An 

Old  -  Fashioned  Senator 


Qrvffie 

Of  Gmnecticut 


V  , 

V 


The  Story  of  a  Life  Unselfishly  Devotecr  to 
Orville  H.   Platt 


Illustrated 


New    York    an 
fmtcfeerbcc 
1910 


An 
Old -Fashioned  Senator 

Orville  H.  Platt 

Of  Connecticut 


The  Story  of  a  Life  Unselfishly  Devoted'  to  the 
Public  Service 


By 
Louis  A.  Coolidge 


Illustrated 


G.  P.  Putnam's  Sons 

New    York    and    London 

Imicfeerbocfeer  press 

1910 


COPYRIGHT,  igro 

BY 
LOUIS    A.    COOLIDGE 


Ube  Itnfcfcerbocfcer  press,  flew  Cork 


Swiftly  the  politic  goes:  is  it  dark? — he 

borrows  a  lantern ; 
Slowly  the  statesman  and  sure,  guiding 

his  steps  by  the  stars. 

LOWELL 


m 
259764 


INTRODUCTORY  NOTE 

AMONG  all  the  public  men  whom  the  writer  of  this 
sketch  has  known  in  the  course  of  an  experience 
in  Washington  embracing  twenty  years,  Senator  Platt 
seems  to  have  approached  most  nearly  the  perfect 
measure  of  disinterested  service.  That  he  should  have 
been  above  any  temptation  to  profit  materially  from 
his  official  place  implies  no  special  virtue,  for  that  is 
fortunately  a  common  attribute  of  Senators  of  the 
United  States;  but  he  possessed  the  rarer  quality  of 
disregard  for  contemporary  applause  or  posthumous 
fame.  He  was  ready  to  do  each  day's  pressing  duty 
conscientiously  and  unselfishly  without  regard  to  its 
effect  upon  his  political  fortune  or  personal  prestige, 
and  having  the  faculty  of  effective  co-operation  in 
an  exceptional  degree,  he  held  the  unbounded  con 
fidence  of  his  associates.  The  impression  created  by 
watching  his  public  conduct  from  year  to  year  has  been 
strengthened  since  this  book  was  undertaken  by  a  study 
of  his  private  life  from  boyhood  and  by  a  perusal  of  the 
fragmentary  correspondence  which,  through  no  design 
of  his,  survives  him.  His  record  from  youth  to  age 
was  one  of  uncalculating  consistency — of  harmonious 
intellectual  and  spiritual  development. 

In  the  decision  of  vital  questions  of  legislation  he 
was  for  years  an  important  and  frequently  a  control 
ling  factor.  During  an  eventful  time  he  exercised  a 
more  pervasive  influence  than  any  other  Senator,  yet 


vi  Introduction 

so  unobtrusively  that  it  was  almost  the  close  of  his 
career  before  his  work  received  adequate  recognition 
except  from  those  who  could  appraise  it  near  at  hand. 
The  Platt  Amendment  first  brought  him  the  distinction 
he  deserved,  but  that  document  was  only  the  triumphant 
application  of  principles  which  he  had  long  maintained. 
His  place  in  American  history  will  be  larger  as  the  years 
goby. 

In  trying  to  delineate  a  character  unusual  in  public 
life,  it  has  been  found  expedient  to  review  briefly  the 
significant  legislation  of  a  quarter  of  a  century  to 
the  shaping  of  which  Senator  Platt 's  practical  wis 
dom,  unfailing  courage,  and  acknowledged  loftiness  of 
purpose  were  indispensable. 

L.  A.  C. 

BOSTON,  February  22,  1910. 


CONTENTS 


I.      JUDEA I 

Birth  and  Ancestry — The  Litchfield  Hills — 
Early  Days  in  Judea — Abolition  and  Re 
ligious  Dissent — The  Underground  Rail 
road — Boyhood  on  the  Farm. 

II.    TEACHER  AND  PUPIL  .         .         .  13 

The  "Master  of  the  Gunnery" — A  Pupil's 
Tribute — School  Days — Ostracism  for 
Anti-Slavery  Views — Teaching  School  in 
Judea — A  Year  at  Towanda — Admission 
to  the  Bar — Marriage — Removal  to 
Meriden — A  Lover  of  the  Woods — Judea 
Revisited — The  Adirondacks. 

III.  MERIDEN  ......       27 

Meriden    and   the    First    Church — Twenty- 
eight  Years  a  Practising  Lawyer — A  Po 
litical     Organizer — Judge     of    Probate — 
Chairman   of   American   and   Republican 
State  Committees — Secretary  of  State — 

A  Member  of  the  General  Assembly — 
Speaker  of  the  House — "Picture  Platt" 
—State's  Attorney— The  Bible  Class- 
Masonry — The  Metabetchouan  Fishing 
and  Game  Club — Interest  in  Business 
Development — Financial  Reverses. 

IV.  THE  MIDNIGHT  CAUCUS       ...       38 

A  Skilfully  Conducted  Canvass — The  Mid 
night  Caucus — Election  to  the  Senate 
— Newspaper  Criticism — Reception  at 
Meriden. 


viii  Contents 


V.    A  LOOKER-ON  IN  THE  SENATE       .         .       54 

First  Experiences  at  Washington — The 
Forty-sixth  Congress — Eulogy  of  Rush 
Clark. 

VI.    DEVELOPMENT  OF  A  LAWMAKER    .         .61 

Growth  in  the  Senate — Personal  Charac 
teristics 

VII.  SAVIOR  OF  THE  PATENT  SYSTEM     .   70 

Chairman  of  the  Patents  Committee — Pre 
serving  the  Patent  System — Speech  of 
March  24,  1884 — Friend  of  the  American 
Inventor. 

VIII.    THE  WORK  FOR  INTERNATIONAL  COPY 
RIGHT,  1884-1891    ....       83 

International  Copyright — A  Legislative 
Triumph — Law  of  1891 — Subsequent 
Legislation. 

IX.    PROTECTOR  OF  THE  INDIAN         .         .114 

The  Red  Man's  Most  Practical  and  Useful 
Friend — Fourteen  Years  with  the  Com 
mittee  on  Indian  Affairs — Prevents  Mis 
chievous  Legislation. 

X.    NEW  STATES  IN  THE  WEST  .         .         .134 

Chairman  of  Committee  on  Territories — 
Instrumental  in  Admitting  Six  New 
States— In  Close  Touch  with  the  West. 

XI.    THE  FOREIGN-BORN  AMERICAN     .         .     147 

Restriction  of  Immigration — Advocate  of 
Reasonable  Legislation — His  Opinion  of 
the  Adopted  Citizen. 

XII.    FAIR  PLAY  TOWARDS  CHINA          .         .     153 

Chinese  Exclusion — Opposes  Act  of  1882 — 
Unsuccessful  Attempt  to  Amend  Geary 
Act — Legislation  of  1888 — Prevents  Dras 
tic  Legislation  in  1902  and  1904. 


Contents 


IX 


XIII.  SOUND  FINANCE  .         .         .         .164 

First  Essays  in  Finance — Refunding  Bill  of 
1 88 1 — Speech  of  February  iyth — Proposes 
Abolition  of  Tax  on  Bank  Circulation. 

XIV.  THE  FREE-SILVER  DELUSION        .         .175 

A  Genuine  Bimetallist — Opposes  Coin  Cer 
tificates  in  1888 — The  Sherman  Law  of 
1890 — Opponent  of  Free  Silver — Objects 
to  Hasty  Repeal  —  Retaliation  against 
Great  Britain. 

XV.    PAPER  MONEY   ...  .189 

Continued  Agitation  for  Free  Silver — Op 
poses  Fictitious  "Seigniorage"  in  1895 — 
Criticism  of  the  Greenbacks — For  Sound 
Money  in  1896 

XVI.    REAL  CURRENCY  REFORM    .         .         .199 

The  Finance  Committee — Helps  to  Frame 
Law  of  1900 — Letter  to  Timothy  D wight 
— Consideration  of  Additional  Measures  of 
Relief — Opposed  to  Asset  Currency — The 
Aldrich  Bill — Conference  at  Warwick — A 
Central  Bank. 

XVII.    A  STAUNCH  PROTECTIONIST          .         .212 

The  Cleveland  Message  of  1887 — Attack 
upon  the  Administration  Policy — A  Com 
prehensive  Plea  for  Protection — Defender 
of  American  Industries — Opposition  to 
the  Mills  Bill — Contrast  between  Labor 
and  Industry  North  and  South — The  Duty 
on  Tin  Plate — The  Tariff  not  Responsible 
for  the  Trusts. 

XVIII.  THE  FATEFUL  FIFTY-FIRST  CONGRESS  227 
McKinley  Tariff  and  the  Lodge  Election 
Bill — Democratic  Obstruction  in  the  Sen 
ate — An  Unswerving  Supporter  of  the 
Party  Programme — Argues  for  Enactment 
of  Both  Bills— The  Quay  Resolution- 
Enactment  of  the  Tariff  Bill— The  Elec- 


Contents 

CHAPTER  PAOB 

tion  Bill  Postponed — Lukewarm  towards 
Elaine's  Reciprocity  Proposal — Unchanged 
by  Republican  Defeat. 

XIX.    THE  WILSON-GORMAN  BILL         .         .     241 

An  Aid  to  the  Finance  Committee — Mr. 
North's  Experience — Active  in  Debate — 
Keen  Analysis  of  the  Democratic  Position 
— "Incidental  Protection"  Ridiculed — 
A  Deadly  Blow  at  Farmers — Opposed  to 
Free  Raw  Materials. 

XX.    THE  DINGLE Y  TARIFF          .         .         .252 

A  Member  of  the  Finance  Committee — A 
Controlling  Factor  in  Tariff  Legislation — 
Attitude  toward  the  Reciprocity  Clauses — 
A  Strong  Advocate  of  Administration 
Policies. 

XXI.    FREE  CUBA 260 

Opposed  to  Recognition  of  Belligerency — 
Tries  to  Prevent  War — Pleads  for  Modera 
tion — A  Pillar  of  Conservatism — A  Strong 
Aid  to  the  Administration — Growth  of 
the  War  Sentiment — Destruction  of  the 
Maine — The  President's  Message — Adop 
tion  of  Resolutions  for  Intervention — 
In  a  Small  Minority — Hostilities  Precipi 
tated. 

XXII.      EXPANSION  AND  IMPERIALISM       .         .     284 

For  Unrelenting  Prosecution  of  the  War 
— Results  of  the  War  Accepted — Annexa 
tion  of  Hawaii — Urges  Retention  of  Philip 
pines — Letter  to  President  McKinley — 
Letter  to  Professor  Fisher — Strongly  Ad 
vocates  Ratification  of  Treaty  of  Peace — 
Speech  of  December  19,  1899 — The  Con 
stitutional  Right  of  the  United  States  to 
Acquire  and  Govern  Territory. 


Contents 


XI 


CHAPTER 

XXIII. 


XXIV. 


XXV. 


XXVI. 


XXVII. 


NATIONAL  DUTY         ....     303 

Debate  with  Senator  Hoar,  February  n, 
1902 — The  Destiny  of  the  Republic — 
Favors  a  Colonial  System. 

ON  GUARD  OVER  CUBA         .         .         .311 

New  Problems — Chairman  of  Committee  on 
Cuban  Relations — Opposed  to  Annexa 
tion — The  Question  of  Sovereignty — 
Visit  to  Cuba,  1900— The  Cuban  Scandal 
— Extra  Allowances. 

CUBAN  SCANDALS  AND  ALLOWANCES    .     324 

Investigation  Authorized — Speech  of  May 
23,  1900 — Longing  for  Home — Corre 
spondence  with  General  Wood. 

THE  PLATT  AMENDMENT     .         .         .     336 

Establishing  a  New  Republic — Conferences 
of  Cuban  Committee — The  Question  of 
Authorship. 


THE  PoRTo-RiCAN  TARIFF  .         -357 

Our  "Plain  Duty"  toward  Porto  Rico — 
Organizes  Opposition  to  Free  Trade  with 
the  Island — A  Successful  Parliamentary 
Campaign — Letter  to  Lyman  Abbott. 

XXVIII.    RECIPROCITY  WITH  CUBA    .         .         .     369 

Bulwark  of  the  Administration — Leader 
of  Long  Struggle  in  Congress — Opposi 
tion  at  Home — Ratification  of  Treaty. 

XXIX.    AGAINST  TARIFF  REVISION  .         .         .     384 

Opposed  to  Tariff  Tinkering  in  1905 — 
Letter  to  President  Roosevelt — Saves 
Dingley  Law. 

XXX.     ANTIQUATED  SENATE  WAYS         .         .     395 

The  Rules  of  the  Senate — Advocates  Open 
Executive  Sessions — Speech  of  April  13, 
1886 — Proposes  Limitation  of  Debate. 


Xll 


Contents 


CHAPTER 

XXXI. 


XXXII. 


XXXIII. 


XXXIV. 


XXXV. 


XXXVI. 


DIGNITY  OF  THE  SENATE    .         .         .411 

"Legislation  by  Unanimous  Consent" — The 
Senate  not  Decadent — Not  a  Rich  Man's 
Club— Opposes  Seating  of  Quay — The 
Tillman-McLaurin  Episode. 

LABOR  AND  CAPITAL    .         .         .         -419 

An  Unbiassed  Judge — Opposed  to  Radical 
Measures — A  Friend  of  the  Workingman 
— Defeats  Anti-Injunction  and  Eight- 
Hour  Bills — Supports  President  Roosevelt 
in  Coal  Strike  and  Northern  Securi 
ties  Case — Address  before  Workingmen's 
Club  at  Hartford — Opposition  to  Anti- 
Option  Bill — Speech  of  January  17-19, 
1893. 

REGULATION  OF  CORPORATIONS  .    .  438 

Favors  Reasonable  Control — Opposes  Sher 
man  Anti-Trust  Bill — In  Sympathy  with 
Roosevelt's  Plans — Against  Littlefield 
Bill  in  1902 — Opposes  Income  and  Cor 
poration  Tax. 

THE  INTERSTATE  COMMERCE  LAW         .      455 

The  Initiatory  Legislation  of  1887 — Op 
poses  Anti-Pooling  Clause — Position  Jus 
tified  by  Events — Favors  Elkins  Bill- 
Opposed  to  Hasty  Legislation  in  1905 — 
"Too  Great  a  Subject  to  Play  with." 

A  ROBUST  AMERICAN  .         .         .      467 

Sturdily  Assertive  in  International  Affairs — 
The  United  States  a  World  Power— Sus 
tains  Cleveland's  Venezuelan  Message — 
Arbitration  with  Great  Britain — The 
Hague  Treaties. 

THE  PANAMA  AFFAIR          .         .         .      483 

Always  for  the  Canal — A  New  Republic  on 
the  Isthmus — Defender  of  the  Adminis 
tration — Speech  of  January  20-21,  1904 — 
The  "Yale  Protest." 


Contents 


Xlll 


CHAPTER  PAGE 

XXXVII.    RELATIONS  WITH  THE  WHITE  HOUSE    .      494 

Dealings  with  Many  Administrations — 
The  River  and  Harbor  Bill— Marshall 
Jewell  and  Garfield — Hawley's  Candidacy 
in  1884— A  Critic  of  Cleveland— Sup 
porter  of  Harrison. 


XXXVIII.      MCKINLEY  AND  HANNA 


502 


Mr.  Platt's  Course  in  1896 — Later  a  Friend  '/ 

of    McKinley    and    Hanna — Hawley    for 
the  Cabinet. 

XXXIX.    ROOSEVELT 511 

A  Loyal  Supporter  of  Roosevelt — Urges 
Nomination  in  1904 — Appeals  to  Busi 
ness  Interests — For  Moderation  in  1905. 

XL.    POLITICS  AND  PATRONAGE    .         .         .     524 

A  Stranger  to  Political  Manipulation — An 
noyed  by  Office  Seekers — Zealous  for 
Connecticut. 

XLI.     CONNECTICUT'S  FIRST  CITIZEN       .         .      535 

Successive  Elections  to  Senate  without  Op 
position — Lack  of  Personal  Organization 
— Offer  of  Position  as  Chief- Justice  of 
Supreme  Court  of  Errors — Rejects  Sug 
gestion  of  Selection  as  President  pro  tern. 

XLII.    THE  FESSENDEN  EPISODE    .         .         .      542 

An  Evanescent  Disturbance — Proposed  for 
Vice-President — Refuses  to  Make  a  Per 
sonal  Canvass  for  Re-election — Election 
in  1897 — Political  Expenditures. 

XLIII.    A  STATE'S  CROWNING  TRIBUTE      .         .     554 

Election  in  1903 — Address  to  Legislature — A 
Senator's  Duty — Reception  by  the  State 
at  Hartford. 

XLIV.    FRUITFUL  YEARS        ....     563 

The  Last  Phase — Ratification  of  Colombian 
Treaty — The  Adirondacks — Special  Ses- 


XIV 


Contents 


sion  of  1903 — Pension  Order  78 — Post- 
Office  Scandals — Death  of  Mark  Hanna — 
Nomination  and  Election  of  Roosevelt, 
1904. 

XLV.    THE  LAST  SESSION      .         .         .  571 

Chairman  of  Judiciary  Committee — The 
Swayne  Impeachment — A  Day's  Doings 
— Legislation  of  Last  Session — Opposes 
Heyburn  Pure  Food  Law. 

XLVI.    THE  END 581 

A  President's  Letter — Funeral  of  General 
Hawley — Address  at  Hartford  —  Death 
and  Burial. 

XLVII.    AN  OLD-FASHIONED  SENATOR      .         .     588 

The  Lincoln  of  New  England — Personal 
Traits— Mental  Habit — Religious  Tenden 
cies — A  Lover  of  Old  Ways — Lofty  Ideals. 

XLVIII.    WORDS  FITLY  SPOKEN 

Tributes  by  his  Associates  in  Public  Life — 
Eulogies  in  the  Senate — Senator  Lodge's 
Estimate  of  his  Character. 


APPENDIX  .  . 

I.  Memorial  Resolutions  adopted  by  the  Con 
necticut  General  Assembly  at  the  January 
Session  Nineteen  Hundred  and  Five. 
II.  Message  of  Governor  Roberts  announcing  to 
the  general  Assembly  the  death  of  Mr. 
Platt. 

III.     Memorials  in  Bronze. 
IV.     The  Platt  National  Park. 
V.     The  Judgment  of  the  Press. 


598 


619 


INDEX 


637 


ILLUSTRATIONS 

FACING  PAGE 

ORVILLE  H.  PLATT         .         .         .  Frontispiece 

From  a  photograph  by  Parker,  Washington,  D.  C. 

THE  BOYHOOD  HOME   OF   ORVILLE    H.   PLATT  AT 

WASHINGTON,  CONN.  ....         4 

WASHINGTON    GREEN    AND    THE    CONGREGATIONAL 

CHURCH  8 

ORVILLE  H.  PLATT,  AGED  18  .         .         .         .12 

From  a  daguerreotype  taken  in  1845 

A  WASHINGTON  TROUT  BROOK      ....      24 

THE  HOME  IN  MERIDEN,  CONN 30 

A  FLY -CASTING  RAPID  OF  THE  SHEPAUG  RIVER  .  34 
ON  THE  WAY  TO  STEEP  ROCK  .  .  .  .150 
IN  CONFERENCE  AT  WARWICK  ....  208 

Senators  Platt,  Spooner,  Allison,  and  Aldrich 

From  a  photograph  by  Edgar  H.  Horton  &  Co.,  Provi 
dence,  R.I. 

FACSIMILE   OF  LETTER    TO    PRESIDENT  MCKINLEY 

CONCERNING  THE  PHILIPPINE  ISLANDS       .         .288 

KIRBY  CORNER,  WASHINGTON,  CONN.      .         .         .     326 

ORVILLE  H.  PLATT 486 

From  a  photograph  by  Prince,  Washington,  D,  C. 


Illustrations 


PACING  PAGE 


THE  LAST  CAMP   IN  THE   ADIRONDACK^,    1904,   AT 

LONG  LAKE  ......     564 

IN  THE  VILLAGE  CEMETERY 584 

THE  MEMORIAL  TABLET  TO  ORVILLE  H.  PLATT 
PLACED  BY  E.  H.  VAN  INGEN,  ESQ.,  IN  THE 
GUNN  MEMORIAL  LIBRARY,  WASHINGTON,  CONN.  590 

A.  Bertram  Pegram,  Sculptor 


Orville  H.  Platt 


Orville  H.  Platt 


CHAPTER  I 

JUDEA 

Birth  and  Ancestry — The  Litchfield  Hills — Early  Days  in  Judea — 

Abolition  and  Religious  Dissent — The  Underground  Railroad — 

Boyhood  on  the  Farm. 

ORVILLE  HITCHCOCK  PLATT  was  born  in  the 
little  town  of  Washington,  Litchfield  County, 
Connecticut,  July  19,  1827.  His  father  was  Daniel 
Gould  Platt;  his  mother,  Almyra  Hitchcock  Platt.  He 
was  fortunate  in  his  inheritance,  in  the  time  and  place 
of  his  birth,  and  in  the  surroundings  of  his  early  years. 
Through  both  father  and  mother  he  was  descended 
from  long  lines  of  New  England  farmers,  who,  genera 
tion  after  generation,  had  stood  for  something  in  the 
communities  in  which  they  lived.  From  father  to 
son  they  held  office  in  the  church  and  in  the  town. 
They  were  landowners,  deacons,  tithing-men,  and 
captains  of  militia.  One  ancestor  was  imprisoned  by 
Governor  Andros  in  1 68 1  for  daring  to  attend  a  meeting 
of  delegates  "to  devise  means  to  obtain  a  redress  of 
grievances  under  his  arbitrary  rule."  Another  was 
among  those  who  marched  to  Fishkill  in  the  Burgoyne 


2  Orville  H.  Platt 

campaign  of  October,  1777,  to  reinforce  General  Put 
nam.  Orville  Platt's  grandfather,  John,  was  also  a 
soldier  in  the  Revolution  and  belonged  to  the  band  of 
"Prison  Ship  Martyrs."  His  own  father  was  deputy 
sheriff  and  judge  of  probate,  a  school-teacher  at  times, 
as  well  as  a  tiller  of  the  soil.  It  was  a  sturdy,  loyal, 
patriotic,  efficient  New  England  stock.1 

For  a  boy  to  have  been  born  in  Litchfield  County  in 

»  THE  PLATT  Genealogy:  The  Platt  family  was  established  in 
New  Haven  County,  in  1638,  when  (I)  RICHARD  PLATT,  an  Eng 
lishman,  and  his  wife  Mary,  with  their  four  children,  landed  at  New 
Haven.  He  was  one  of  the  sixty-one  who  formed  a  church  society, 
August  22,  1639,  and  proceeded  at  once  to  settle  at  Milford.  Of 
his  eight  children,  the  third,  (and  second  son,)  (II)  ISAAC,  was  en 
rolled  in  1666  among  the  fifty-seven  landowners  of  Huntington, 
Long  Island,  where  he  had  probably  lived  some  years.  He  was 
recorded  there  in  1687.  In  Milford,  he  married  Phoebe  Smith, 
March  12,  1640,  and,  more  than  twenty  years  later,  he  married  at 
Huntington,  Elizabeth,  daughter  of  Jonas  Wood.  He  was  captain 
of  militia,  and  held  every  office  of  consequence  in  the  town,  where 
he  died  July  31,  1691. 

He  had  six  children;  the  eldest  son  and  second  child,  (III) 
JONAS,  born  August  16,  1667,  married  Sarah  Scudder,  and  had 
four  sons:  (IV)  OBADIAH,  the  eldest  of  these,  purchased  lands  in 
Fairfield  in  1724.  He  married  Mary  Smith,  August  10,  1722,  and 
had  eight  children.  The  wife  and  mother  died  November  16,  1771, 
at  Ridgefield.  (V)  JONAS,  their  second  son  and  third  child,  born 
October  9,  1727,  settled  at  Redding,  where  he  was  married,  October 
17,  1747,  to  Elizabeth,  daughter  of  Ephraim  Sanford  of  that  place. 
Both  were  admitted  church  members  at  Redding,  July  5,  1749. 
They  had  ten  children,  of  whom  the  eldest,  (VI)  JOHN,  was  baptized 
February  5,  1752,  at  Redding.  Both  father  and  son  served  as 
soldiers  in  the  Revolutionary  Army,  and  the  former  was  made 
prisoner  in  the  Danbury  raid  in  April,  1777,  but  appeared  among 
those  who  marched  to  Fishkill  in  the  following  October,  to  reinforce 
General  Putnam.  The  son  was  taken  prisoner  at  Fort  Lee,  Novem 
ber  1 6,  1776.  He  married  Elizabeth  Parmelee  July  7,  1775,  an^ 
settled  after  the  war  in  the  town  of  Washington,  Connecticut. 
Their  children  were:  John,  born  February  21,  1776;  David,  born 
August  31,  1778;  Ruth  Ann,  March  31,  1782;  Betsy,  May  8,  1790; 
Daniel  Gould,  July  25,  1797. 


Judea  3 

the  early  days  of  the  last  century  was  to  have  been 
placed  in  the  pathway  of  opportunity.  Nature  has 
been  gracious  to  the  region  round  about.  Lying  at  the 
southernmost  spur  of  the  Berkshires,  villages  perched 
on  the  brows  of  many  hills  look  out  over  the  winding 
valleys  of  the  Housatonic  and  Shepaug.  The  town  of 
Litchfield  is  one  of  the  historic  places  of  America,  rich 
in  memories  of  famous  men  and  happenings.  It  was 
the  seat  of  the  earliest  law  school  in  America,  and  the 
home  either  temporary  or  permanent  of  many  who 
were  eminent  at  the  bar  or  in  the  pulpit.  Lyman 
Beecher  preached  there  for  years;  Henry  Ward  Beecher 
and  Harriet  Beecher  Stowe  were  born  there.  It  was 
the  home  of  Oliver  Wolcott  and  the  birthplace  of 
Ethan  Allen.  It  had  been  the  home  of  Colonel  Tal- 
madge,  an  aide  on  General  Washington's  staff.  Aaron 
Burr  lived  there  for  a  year  as  a  young  man.  Horace 
Bushnell,  whose  name  is  honored  throughout  the 
world,  was  born  in  Litchfield  and  spent  his  youth  at 
New  Preston,  near-by.  Many  others  might  be  named 
whose  fame  lends  interest  and  character  to  the  charm 
ing  town.  In  the  early  years  of  the  last  century,  the 

(VII)  DANIEL  GOULD  PLATT,  married  Almyra  Hitchcock,  Jan 
uary  3,  1817,  and  they  had  children:  Orville,  born  March  n,  1822, 
who  died  in  1826;  Orville  Hitchcock,  born  July  19,  1827,  in 
Washington;  and  Simeon  D.,  born  February  12,  1832.  The  father 
died  October  26,  1871. 

1638. 

RICHARD  PLATT,  New  Haven,  Connecticut. 

ISAAC,  Huntington,  Long  Island. 

JONAS, 

OBADIAH,  Fail-field  and  Redding. 

JONAS,  Redding. 

JOHN,  Redding  and  Washington. 

DANIEL  GOULD,  Washington,  Connecticut. 

ORVILLE  HITCHCOCK,  Washington. 


4  Orville  H.  Platt 

place  was  at  its  best,  and  Orville  Platt,  born  and  bred 
twelve  miles  to  the  south  in  the  equally  beautiful 
village  of  Washington,  could  hardly  have  avoided 
absorbing  some  of  the  inspiration  of  the  environment. 
Within  a  radius  of  fifteen  miles  of  his  birthplace,  were 
two  other  towns  of  Litchfield  County  rich  in  associa 
tions.  At  New  Milford  to  the  south,  Roger  Sherman 
lived  for  twenty  years.  At  Torrington,  an  equal 
distance  to  the  north,  John  Brown  was  born. 

The  town  of  Washington  in  its  own  right  could  claim 
distinction.  It  was  organized  during  the  throes  of  the 
struggle  for  independence  by  uniting  two  ancient 
Ecclesiastical  Societies,  and  it  is  said  to  have  been  the 
first  community  in  America  to  adopt  the  name  of  the 
Father  of  his  Country.  The  older  of  these  societies, 
comprising  the  village  of  Judea,  lay  on  a  level  plateau 
overlooking  the  valley  through  which  the  Shepaug 
goes  tumbling  down  to  meet  the  Housatonic.  Four 
miles  away,  on  the  other  side  of  a  high  hill,  were  the 
villages  of  Marbledale  and  New  Preston,  which  com 
prised  the  other  Ecclesiastical  Society.  It  was  in  the 
village  of  Judea  that  Orville  H.  Platt  was  born, — a 
community  puritan  and  conservative  to  the  roots. 
New  Preston,  on  the  other  hand,  had  always  been  known 
as  the  home  of  religious  and  political  dissent.  It  was 
the  youthful  Platt 's  good  fortune  to  develop  into  man 
hood  at  a  time  when  that  part  of  New  England,  like 
many  others,  was  in  the  midst  of  a  moral  revolution. 
The  year  in  which  he  was  born,  1827,  was  the  year  in 
which  William  Lloyd  Garrison  became  the  editor  of  the 
National  Philanthropist.  Four  years  later,  Garrison 
established  The  Liberator.  The  ancient  community  of 
Washington  offered  fertile  soil  in  which  to  sow  the 
Abolition  seed,  and  Daniel  Gould  Platt  was  one  of 


Judea  5 

those  who  received  the  seed  gladly.  In  1837,  shortly 
after  the  martyrdom  of  Lovejoy,  an  Abolition  conven 
tion  met  at  Hartford,  and  Daniel  Platt  attended  it  with 
his  wife.  There  were  four  others  in  attendance  from 
Judea — Mr.  and  Mrs.  John  Gunn,  and  Mr.  and  Mrs. 
Lewis  A.  Canfield — representatives  of  a  family  \\hich 
was  to  count  for  much  in  Orville  Platt 's  life.  From 
that  time,  for  many  years,  this  faithful  group  were  the 
centre  of  a  storm  of  persecution  by  which  less  heroic 
souls  would  have  been  overwhelmed.  The  pastor  of  the 
Judea  church  was  Reverend  Gordon  Hayes,  an  able 
and  bigoted  theologian.  Abolitionism  he  regarded  as  a 
heresy  and  he  set  about  to  stamp  it  out.  He  devoted 
sermon  after  sermon  to  attacks  upon  the  strange  doc 
trine,  denouncing  it  in  the  name  of  patriotism  and 
religion.  He  found  sanction  for  slavery  in  the  Bible, 
and  he  was  as  honest  as  he  was  earnest  in  his  attacks 
upon  those  who  sought  to  bring  it  to  an  end.  The 
Abolitionists  were  equally  intense.  They  held  meet 
ings  in  which  their  speakers  cried  out  against  slavery  as 
a  sin  and  forswore  communion  with  slaveholders  as 
collusion  with  sin.  Finally  an  extraordinary  episode 
brought  on  the  crisis  with  a  rush.  Miss  Abby  Kelly 
in  1839  was  known  far  and  wide  as  an  Abolition  speaker. 
In  August  of  that  year  she  was  preaching  the  New 
Evangel  throughout  western  Connecticut,  and  Daniel 
Platt  and  Lewis  Canfield  with  their  wives  drove  to  a 
neighboring  town  and  brought  her  to  Washington, 
where  she  remained  for  a  fortnight,  appearing  at 
numerous  Abolition  meetings.  For  women  to  speak 
in  public  was  in  those  days  an  almost  unheard  of  thing, 
and  for  one  to  enter  actively  into  the  discussion  of 
political  affairs  was  revolutionary  and  abhorrent. 
Parson  Hayes  and  his  conservative  congregation  were 


6  Orville  H.  Platt 

shaken  with  wrath.  The  impudent  challenge  of  the 
Abolitionists  was  met  with  promptness  and  decision. 
Under  the  date  of  August  8,  1839,  there  appears  in  the 
records  of  the  Judea  church  the  following  entry : 

At  a  meeting  of  the  church  convened  in  consequence  of  a 
notice  of  a  meeting  of  the  Anti-Slavery  Society  at  which 
it  was  said  a  female  would  lecture : 

Resolved,  That  we  are  opposed  to  the  introduction  of 
female  public  lecturers  into  this  society  by  members  of 
this  church,  and  to  females  giving  such  lectures  in  it. 

This  action  was  followed  promptly  by  Mr.  Hayes  in 
a  sermon  from  the  following  plain-spoken  text: 

Notwithstanding  I  have  a  few  things  against  thee,  be 
cause  thou  sufferest  that  woman  Jezebel,  which  calleth  her 
self  a  prophetess,  to  teach  and  to  seduce  my  servants  to 
commit  fornication,  and  to  eat  things  sacrificed  unto  idols. 

And  I  gave  her  space  to  repent  of  her  fornication;  and 
she  repented  not. 

Behold,  I  will  cast  her  into  a  bed,  and  them  that  commit 
adultery  with  her  into  great  tribulation,  except  they  re 
pent  of  their  deeds. — Rev.  ii.,  20-22. 

The  sermon  fitted  the  text.  The  reverend  preacher, 
looking  over  to  where  Miss  Abby  Kelly  sat  in  the  con 
gregation,  referred  to  female  lecturers  travelling  alone 
by  night  and  by  day,  and  plainly  intimated  that  the 
lady's  character  was  no  better  than  it  ought  to  be.  As 
the  benediction  was  pronounced,  John  Gunn  called 
down  from  the  gallery  that  the  minister's  insinuations 
were  false.  As  the  preacher  was  leaving  the  church, 
Miss  Abby  Kelly  walked  directly  up  to  him  and  said  : 

"  Gordon  Hayes,  you  have  said  things  most  injurious 
to  my  character.  I  hope  God  will  forgive  you . ' ' 

After  such  an  episode,  the  warring  factions  could  not 


Judea  7 

listen  to  the  word  of  God  from  the  same  pulpit.  The 
Abolitionists  withdrew  and  organized  a  church  of  their 
own.  Their  secession  was  followed  promptly  by  ex 
communication.  They  had  no  recognized  place  of 
meeting,  but  gathered  in  different  villages  all  over 
the  county,  often  compelled  to  resort  to  barns  and 
groves.  Among  these  covenanters  were  Daniel  Gould 
Platt  and  Almyra  Hitchcock  Platt.  Their  oldest  boy, 
Orville,  was  then  at  the  impressionable  age  of  twelve 
years. 

A  little  later,  the  Reverend  Gordon  Hayes  himself 
became  discredited  by  the  vigor  of  a  sermon  denounc 
ing  calisthenics,  promiscuous  dancing,  and  tableaux  as 
the  service  of  Satan  and  the  sure  concomitants  of  vice. 
He  was  dismissed  from  the  church,  and  with  his  de 
parture  the  differences  gradually  were  healed.  The 
Abolitionists  who  had  been  excommunicated  were 
privately  invited  to  re-unite  with  the  church.  They 
declined,  but  the  bitterness  of  the  conflict  was  at  an 
end.1 

i  Of  this  time,  nearly  fifty  years  later,  Mr.  Platt  wrote: 
"It  was  the  time  of  the  fierce  Anti-Slavery  excitement — one  of 
those  periods  in  the  history  of  communities  when  the  hearts  of 
men  are  stirred  to  attack  great  and  hideous  wrongs,  and  to  do 
battle  for  the  right  with  a  zeal  and  courage  which  cannot  be  hin 
dered  or  abated  until  the  right  triumphs — a  time  when  not  only 
fetters  on  human  limbs  but  fetters  on  human  thought  were  to  be 
broken. 

"A  great  reform  had  begun.  A  few  men  had  seen  the  wickedness 
of  slavery  and  had  fathered  the  movement  for  its  Abolition.  Hu 
man  rights  in  the  eyes  of  these  men  had  become  sacred,  and  they 
had  determined  that  they  should  be  recognized  and  respected. 
Slavery  was  strongly  intrenched  and  defended.  Its  power  was 
everywhere  felt;  its  influence  penetrated  the  state,  the  church, 
society.  It  was  a  fearful  sin  and  crime  against  God  and  against 
man,  and  eyes  to  see  its  wickedness  and  courage  to  attack  it  were 
given  to  only  a  few  rare  souls.  They  made  the  fight  manfully 
and  nobly,  but  they  were  met  and  opposed  by  almost  the  entire 


8  Orville  H.  Platt 

From  father  and  mother  of  deep  religious  convictions, 
militant  Abolitionists  who  were  ready  to  suffer  excom 
munication  from  the  church  for  an  ideal,  Orville  Platt 
inherited  a  conscience,  righteous  courage,  and  lofty 
principles.  Every  particle  of  information  that  comes 

people.  An  Abolitionist  was  but  one  against  a  hundred  or  a 
thousand.  The  assailants  of  slavery  were  proscribed,  shunned, 
mobbed,  and  treated  as  social  outcasts.  Neither  they  nor  their 
children  were  welcomed  in  the  house  of  one  who  was  not  an  Abo 
litionist.  The  social  proscription  of  those  days  can  scarcely  be 
understood  or  imagined.  Probably  the  world  has  never  seen  a 
loftier  courage  or  more  heroic  living  than  was  manifested  by  the 
men  who  saw  their  duty  to  the  slave,  and  through  the  slave  to 
humanity.  The  slave  was  a  man,  and  as  such,  men  were  ready 
to  suffer  all  things  in  his  behalf,  to  die  if  necessary. 

"  Like  all  reformers,  the  Abolitionist  was  aggressive.  Slavery  was 
the  crime  of  crimes,  and  it  was,  in  his  conviction,  the  solemn  duty 
of  all  men  to  attack  it.  Whoever  defended  or  apologized  for  it 
was  as  wicked  as  the  slaveholders.  The  Whig  party  was  deemed 
to  be  governed  by  the  slaveholders,  so  the  Abolitionists  withdrew 
from  it  and  made  war  upon  it.  The  Constitution  was  claimed  to 
guarantee  the  right  of  property  in  slaves,  and  the  Abolitionists 
repudiated  and  denounced  the  Constitution.  But  the  battle  raged 
fiercest  in  the  church.  Slavery  was  defended  from  the  Bible; 
church  organizations  refused,  upon  the  demand  of  the  Abolitionists, 
to  pass  resolutions  against  the  institution,  or  to  say  that  slave- 
holding  was  incompatible  with  church  membership  or  Christian 
character;  while  ministers  preached  in  favor  of  slavery  and  against 
the  Abolitionists. 

"  The  little  town  of  Washington  was  in  a  fever  of  excitement. 
The  minister  from  the  pulpit  thundered  anathemas  against  the 
Abolitionists,  while  they,  in  their  turn,  denounced  the  church, 
and  those  of  its  members  who  apologized  for  slavery  and  the  slave 
holder,  as  equal  in  guilt  with  him.  The  minister  proclaimed  the 
authority  of  the  church  to  bind  its  members;  the  Abolitionists,  in 
turn,  defied  the  church.  The  doctrines  of  the  church  came  to 
stand  for  religion,  and  the  Abolitionists  attacked  not  only  the 
church  but  its  creed.  The  church  retorted  with  the  cry  of  infi 
delity,  excommunicated  the  unruly  and  insubordinate  members, 
and  was,  for  the  time  being,  victorious.  It  will  be  readily  seen  that 
such  a  conflict  went  to  the  roots  of  religious  faith  and  doctrine. 
Men  became  freethinkers,  in  the  sense  that  they  thought  freely 


Judea  9 

down  to  us  concerning  this  remarkable  couple  tends  to 
increase  our  respect  for  them.  For  years  they  carried 
on  their  fight  against  slavery,  buoyed  up  by  the  in 
spiration  of  the  little  band  of  Abolition  co-workers. 
Many  years  after  their  death,  an  old  friend  in  a  remi 
niscent  letter  dated  July  6,  1901,  wrote  to  Senator 
Platt  of  a  visit  to  Judea  in  1847 : 

I  was  at  home  in  your  father's  house.  He  is  one  amongst 
the  early  Abolitionists  who  is  silhouetted  on  my  memory 
most  vividly,  and  of  all  the  Anti-Slavery  women,  your 
mother  is  so  distinctly  in  the  foreground,  the  others  of  our 
State  seem  accessories.  I  cannot  define  the  elements  of 
her  personality  and  character,  but  they  stand  out  in  my 
memory  with  such  clearness  that  half  a  century  has  not 
dimmed  the  features. 

Your  father  was  a  full-grown  man  in  stature,  as  well  as  in 
conscience  and  intellect;  your  mother,  a  heroic  soul,  one 
among  ten  thousand.  I  see  her  now  as  she  was  in  1842-8 
to  the  hunted  Abolitionist,  "the  shadow  of  a  great  rock  in  a 
weary  land."1 

and  fearlessly.  Sometimes,  doubtless,  they  were  wrong,  but 
always  in  earnest  and  outspoken.  Creeds  could  not  bind  the  con 
sciences  of  such  men.  They  found  a  law  higher  than  creeds;  they 
inquired  only  what  was  duty  to  God  and  man,  and  did  their  duty 
as  they  saw  it." 

i  A  school-fellow  has  said  of  Orville  Platt's  father  and  mother: 
"Daniel  Platt  was  a  man  of  fine  face  and  figure,  intelligent,  kindly, 
and  courteous.  He  took  a  prominent  part  in  town  politics  and 
religious  meetings,  and  was  a  forcible,  modest,  and  convincing 
speaker.  Orville's  mother  was  a  stately,  handsome  woman,  quiet 
in  manner,  prudent  in  speech,  but  positive  in  her  convictions. 
She  seldom  mingled  in  social  gatherings,  but  found  her  greatest 
pleasure  in  the  simple  home  life,  attending  to  her  domestic  duties, 
reading  the  Scriptures  and  standard  works,  and  teaching  her  boys 
by  precept  and  example  the  virtues  of  goodness,  charity,  sobriety, 
and  whatever  else  contributed  to  the  development  of  sturdy  self- 
reliance  and  manly  manhood.  In  all  the  essentials  of  wise  char 
acter  building  she  was  never  lacking.  The  impress  she  left  on 


io  Orville  H.  Platt 

Daniel  Platt 's  home  was  a  station  on  the  under 
ground  railway.  Many  a  trembling  black  refugee  came 
there  by  night  to  be  forwarded  by  him  on  the  road  to 
Canada.  The  usual  route  was  by  way  of  New  Milford, 
to  Washington,  whence  they  were  taken  by  night  to 
General  Uriel  Tuttle's  in  Torrington  or  Dr.  Vaill's  on 
the  Wolcottville  road.  Orville,  a  boy  in  his  teens,  used 
to  accompany  his  father  frequently  on  these  trips. 
The  slaves  stayed,  as  a  rule,  but  a  short  time  at  the 
Platt  farm,  though  some  remained  for  several  weeks 
until  it  was  learned,  through  the  channels  of  communi 
cation  among  Abolitionists,  that  their  whereabouts  was 
suspected;  then  they  were  sent  on. 

Aside  from  such  incidents  typical  of  an  heroic  time, 
the  lad's  life  was  that  of  the  ordinary  farmer's  boy  of 
the  day.  His  parents  had  neither  poverty  nor  riches. 
The  farm  his  father  tilled  was  rented  on  shares.  The 
home,  a  typical  farmhouse  of  the  time,  still  stands. 
One  who  remembers  the  early  days  says : 

Orville's  mind  was  wholesome  and  lasting.  She  was  ever  a  living 
memory  in  his  heart,  and  he  never  spoke  of  her  except  in  terms  of 
reverent  affection.  She  was  an  excellent  housewife,  baked  her 
own  bread,  made  her  own  butter,  and  kept  the  wearing  apparel 
of  father  and  sons,  as  well  as  her  own,  in  excellent  condition. 
Farmers'  wives  had  to  work  in  those  days,  and  Mrs.  Platt  never 
shirked  her  share.  Her  kitchen,  dining-  and  sitting-rooms  (the 
parlor  was  a  later  innovation),  were  always  cleanly  and  inviting." 
Almyra  Hitchcock  was  one  of  a  numerous  family,  several  of 
whom  emigrated  to  the  Western  Reserve  in  Ohio,  where  their 
descendants  still  live.  A  brother  was  Samuel  J.  Hitchcock,  born 
at  Bethlehem,  Connecticut,  and  graduated  at  Yale  in  1809.  He 
was  a  tutor  at  Yale  from  1811  to  1815,  and  was  subsequently, 
until  his  death,  instructor  of  law.  He  received  the  degree  of  LL.D. 
in  1842.  Died  in  1845.  He  was  mayor  of  the  city  of  New  Haven, 
judge  of  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas,  and  commissioner  of  bank 
ruptcy  during  the  continuance  of  the  national  bankruptcy  law. 
Another  brother,  Benjamin,  was  an  editor  of  the  New  Haven 
Journal  and  Courier. 


Judea  ii 

The  home  was  a  two-storied  white  structure  about  a  mile 
from  town,  facing  southerly,  a  pleasant  yard  in  front  en 
closing  shrubbery  and  the  inevitable  lilac  bushes,  the 
earliest  harbingers  of  a  New  England  spring.  It  was 
situated  on  a  high  plateau  sloping  to  the  roadway  and 
thence  to  a  ravine,  through  which  ran  a  brook  that 
crossed  the  road  farther  down,  affording  a  favorite  drink 
ing  place  for  horses.  On  the  east  was  the  garden  patch, 
and  north,  the  farm,  small-sized  and  stony.  The  roadway 
passing  by  the  house  made  a  circuit  towards  the  north 
through  chestnut  woods,  then  turning  to  the  right  came 
to  the  house  of  Elnathan  Mitchell,  a  brother  of  the  famous 
scientist,  Professor  Mitchell  of  North  Carolina. 

During  the  busy  haying  season,  as  a  rule,  twelve  or 
thirteen  men  would  be  employed,  and  the  mother  always 
took  care  of  them  unaided  by  any  maid.  In  the 
morning,  when  all  were  gathered  for  family  worship,  the 
father  would  read  the  Scripture  and  the  mother  would 
explain  it.  Young  Platt  worked  with  his  father  until 
he  was  eighteen  years  of  age.  Sometimes  he  worked 
for  other  farmers  for  wages.  Daniel  Nettleton,  who 
used  to  be  employed  on  the  Platt  farm  during  haying, 
says  of  him : 

Orville  was  a  fine  mower,  cutting  faster  and  closer,  and 
carrying  a  much  wider  swath  than  any  of  the  men.  It  was 
the  custom  in  those  days  to  start  a  large  number  of  men 
mowing,  one  just  behind  another,  and  Orville  was 
always  put  ahead,  leading  the  field  from  the  start  and 
right  through. 

As  a  boy  [Mr.  Platt  wrote  once  to  a  friend],  I  used  to 
make  maple  syrup  on  my  father's  farm,  after  the  rude 
methods  of  those  days,  carrying  sap  buckets  on  a  neck  yoke 
sometimes  a  quarter  to  a  third  of  a  mile,  boiling  it  away  to 


12  Orville  H.  Platt 

syrup  or  sugaring-off  point  in  an  old  potash  kettle  in  an 
outhouse  at  home — so  I  think  I  know  when  it  is  good.1 

As  a  boy  just  bursting  into  young  manhood  Orville 
Platt  is  remembered  as  "  fine-looking,  tall,  and  hand 
some,  with  beautiful  dark  brown  hair  and  eyes/'  One 
who  afterwards  came  to  know  him  intimately  says: 

All  my  life  I  have  carried  in  my  mind  the  picture  of 
Orville  Platt  and  his  younger  brother,  Simeon,  as  they 
used  to  come  into  the  gallery  of  the  old  Judea  church. 
Orville  was  the  tallest  and  handsomest  young  man  I  have 
ever  seen. 

i  Many  years  later  in  the  United  States  Senate,  Mr.  Platt  re 
ferred  to  conditions  in  his  native  State  during  his  boyhood  as 
follows:  "I  am  not  a  very  old  man,  but  recollection  carries  me  back 
fifty  years,  when  there  was  no  railroad,  no  coal  used,  no  steam 
power  used;  no  woollen  factories  except  of  the  rudest  sort;  no  tele 
graph  in  Connecticut.  Possibly  there  were  one  hundred  tons  of 
coal  consumed  in  the  State  annually.  It  is  possible  that  there  was 
the  rude  beginning  of  manufacturing  establishments  in  which 
steam  was  the  motive  power;  but  practically  there  were  none  of 
these  improvements  in  Connecticut.  The  people  were  rural  and 
agricultural;  a  few  shops,  water  furnishing  the  motive  power,  were 
scattered  up  and  down  the  streams  of  the  State,  but  almost  the 
entire  population  were  engaged  in  agriculture.  It  was  a  time  when 
the  handbrake  and  the  hetchel  prepared  the  flax  which  was  raised 
within  her  borders,  when  hand-spinning  and  the  hand-loom  pre 
pared  it  for  use.  My  mind  goes  back  and  takes  in  the  days  of  my 
early  boyhood,  when  wool  was  carded  by  hand,  when  it  was  spun 
and  woven  by  the  mothers  and  the  daughters,  when  it  was  then 
taken  to  the  fulling-mill  and  when  the  tailoress  came  and  in  the 
household  cut  and  made  the  cloth  into  garments  for  the  use  of 
the  family.  It  was  the  day  of  the  village  shoemaker,  the  day  of  the 
grist-mill,  the  day  of  the  stage-coach,  the  day  of  the  pillion.  There 
were  no  carpets;  no  piano;  few  books;  hand-sewing  only;  hand- 
knitting;  the  tallow  candle;  the  unwarmed,  unlighted  church;  the 
schoolhouse  with  its  hard,  rough  benches;  and  the  slow  post-route, 
the  mail  once  a  week;  a  weekly  paper  only.  It  was  a  week's 
journey  from  Connecticut  to  Washington;  six  weeks'  journey  from 
Connecticut  to  Ohio.  Five  thousand  dollars  in  those  days  was  a 
competence  and  $10,000  was  a  fortune." 


ORVILLE    H.    PLATT,    AGED    18 

FROM  A  DAGUERREOTYPE  TAKEN  IN  1845 


CHAPTER  II 

TEACHER  AND  PUPIL 

The  "Master  of  the  Gunnery" — A  Pupil's  Tribute — School  Days — 
Ostracism  for  Anti-Slavery  Views — Teaching  School  in  Judea — 
A  Year  at  Towanda — Admission  to  the  Bar — Marriage — Re 
moval  to  Meriden — A  Lover  of  the  Woods — Judea  Revisited — 
The  Adirondacks. 

FREDERICK  W.  GUNN,  the  "  Master  of  the  Gun 
nery,"  well  beloved  by  generations  of  schoolboys 
and  revered  by  the  elders,  merits  a  place  in  this  book  for 
the  noble  influence  he  exerted  on  Orville  Platt's  life. 
Although  ten  years  the  senior  of  the  younger  man,  he 
was  friend  and  comrade  as  well  as  teacher.  No  story 
of  Washington  and  Litchfield  County  would  approach 
completeness  which  failed  to  say  something  of  this 
extraordinary  man.  He  was  a  younger  brother  of  that 
John  Gunn  who  was  associated  with  Daniel  Platt  in 
Abolition  activities  and  he  was  destined  to  be  as  stout 
an  adversary  of  slavery  as  any  of  his  elders.  No 
more  tender  tribute  to  a  friend  was  ever  penned  than 
the  sketch  which  Senator  Platt  contributed  to  a  me 
morial  of  Mr.  Gunn  printed  in  1887.  It  reveals  much 
of  the  inner  life  of  both  men  and  is  significant  of  the 
influences  that  went  to  shape  the  character  and  career 
of  the  younger. 

' '  He  was  more  to  me  than  a  teacher,"  writes  the  pupil 
grown  old;  "my  love  for  him  was  the  love  one  has  for 
father,  brother,  and  friend." 

13 


i4  Orville  H.  Platt 

Frederick  W.  Gunn  was  born  in  1816  about  a  mile 
from  Washington  Green.  He  was  the  youngest  of 
eight  children,  all  of  whom  became  identified  with  the 
Anti-Slavery  cause.  The  eldest,  John,  "a  man  singu 
larly  gentle,  open-hearted,  simple,  and  honest,  but 
made  of  the  stuff  we  worship  in  heroes  and  martyrs," 
was  conspicuous  in  the  leadership  of  the  little  Abolition 
band  and  was  identified  closely  with  Daniel  and  Almyra 
Platt.  It  has  been  said  of  him  that  "  although  by 
nature  one  of  the  most  modest  and  quiet  of  men,  and 
shrinking  from  public  gaze,  he  surprised  both  friends 
and  foes  by  becoming  one  of  the  boldest,  sternest,  and 
most  aggressive  champions  of  the  slave." 

Frederick,  the  "Master  of  the  Gunnery,"  entered 
Yale  College  in  the  Class  of  1 83  7 .  Among  his  classmates 
were  Chief- Justice  M.  R.  Waite,  William  M.  Evarts, 
Edwards  Pierrepont,  and  Benjamin  Silliman. 

His  scholarship  was  good  but  not  conspicuous  [says 
his  pupil  biographer  in  words  that  might  well  have  been 
self-descriptive].  He  was  not  a  bookworm ;  not  a  plodder. 
The  time  and  energy  which,  perhaps,  otherwise  applied, 
might  have  won  him  the  first  honors,  were  largely  used 
in  the  study  of  literature  and  poetry.  .  .  .  Transferred 
to  the  city  he  lost  none  of  his  love  for  country  sur 
roundings.  He  excelled  in  the  study  of  botany.  He  loved 
the  freedom  of  the  open  fields — the  solitude  of  the  seashore. 
In  those  days  as  all  through  his  later  years,  he  was  fond  of 
hunting  and  fishing.  He  enjoyed  such  pastimes  with  the 
relish  of  the  true  hunter  and  angler,  whose  real  pleasure  is 
found,  not  in  killing  game  and  catching  fish,  but  in  the 
exhilaration  which  comes  to  one  who  roams  alone  the  woods 
and  fields,  in  the  quiet  peace  of  mind  experienced  when  he 
wanders  by  the  brookside,  and  watches  the  flow  of  the 
rippling  water.  .  .  .  His  ideal  was  manliness.  His  develop 
ment  of  that  ideal  was  along  the  line  of  physical,  intellectual, 


Teacher  and  Pupil  15 

and  sentimental  growth.  He  cultivated  muscle,  health, 
imagination,  taste,  intellect!  .  .  .  His  idea  of  education, 
acted  upon  in  his  own  college  experience  as  well  as  when 
he  came  to  be  a  teacher,  was  the  perfecting  of  a  noble 
manhood — the  creating  of  a  noble  life. 

After  leaving  college,  he  began  teaching  at  the 
Academy  in  New  Preston,  and,  in  1839,  he  opened  his 
school  in  the  Academy  at  Judea.  It  was  here  that 
Orville  H.  Platt,  who  had  begun  his  education  in  the 
Old  Red  Schoolhouse  on  the  Green,  first  fell  under  his 
inspiring  influence.  Mr.  Gunn's  success  at  New  Preston 
had  given  him  prestige,  and  at  the  beginning  his  school 
was  filled  beyond  its  capacity.  But  a  great  change 
was  at  hand : 

His  development  had  thus  far  been  in  the  direction  of 
mental  and  sentimental  growth  [says  his  biographer].  His 
brain  had  become  keen  and  analytical;  he  was  logical, 
and  a  dangerous  antagonist  in  debate.  He  had  cultivated 
a  pure  and  elevated  taste,  and  an  admiration  for  the  noble 
and  heroic,  but  his  moral  nature  as  yet  had  had  little  to 
test  it.  Naturally  of  upright  life,  he  had  had  little  occasion 
to  think  of  abstract  principles  or  to  study  abstract  ques 
tions  of  duty.  But  a  crisis  was  coming.  Manliness,  truth, 
principle,  were  words  which  were  to  have  new  meanings 
for  him.  Right  was  to  become  to  him  the  touchstone  of 
life.  To  follow  duty  wherever  and  however  it  seemed  to 
lead  was  to  be  for  him  a  new  experience,  and  duty  and 
right  were  to  lead  him  into  the  face  of  trials,  of  difficulties, 
of  opposition,  of  persecution,  through  "detraction  and  abuse, 
such  as  we,  with  the  lapse  of  these  intervening  years,  can 
scarcely  realize.1 

1  "It  is  not  easy  to  sketch  the  life  of  a  friend  whose  memory  we 
cherish  as  a  rich  legacy.  For  as  we  knew  him  through  the  medium 
of  our  love,  as  we  perceived  his  admirable  qualities  through  the 
lens  of  a  silent  sympathy,  it  is  very  natural  that  we  should  shrink 


16  Orville  H.  Platt 

It  was  near  the  beginning  of  the  fierce  Anti-Slavery 
agitation.  Frederick  Gunn,  convinced  by  the  argu 
ments  of  his  brother  John  that  slavery  was  wrong, 
became  a  leader  on  the  Anti-Slavery  side.  His  fear 
lessness,  his  severity  of  attack,  his  ability  of  statement, 
and  his  force  of  argument  marked  him  out  for  special 

from  disclosing  to  others  the  estimate  of  his  character  we  have 
thus  acquired.  We  do  not  like  to  analyze  his  character;  we  prefer 
rather  to  regard  it  as  a  unit.  It  seems  unnatural  to  weigh  and 
compare  its  differing  constituents,  to  question  and  decide  which 
particular  trait  most  endeared  our  friend  to  us,  or  made  him  most 
helpful  to  others;  above  all,  the  consciousness  that  we  can  never  so 
describe  him  that  he  will  appear  to  others  as  he  did  to  us,  and  the 
certainty  that  our  portrait  will  be  sadly  imperfect,  make  us  feel 
at  the  outset  that  we  may  regret  having  attempted  the  work.  And 
so  I  hesitate,  almost  fear,  to  attempt  the  story  of  Mr.  Gunn's  early 
life  and  struggles.  He  was  more  to  me  than  a  teacher;  my  love 
for  him  was  the  love  one  has  for  father,  brother,  and  friend.  To 
those  who  knew  him  as  I  knew  him,  all  I  can  write  will  seem  unap- 
preciative.  To  those  who  knew  him  but  casually,  it  may,  in  some 
measure,  set  forth  and  account  for  his  rare  development  of  manhood 
and  manly  goodness.  .  .  . 

"  Mr.  Gunn  was  a  rarely  developed  man,  possessing  largely  all 
those  generous  qualities  and  characteristics  which  inspire  confidence 
and  love  in  others.  Keen  and  vigorous  of  intellect,  he  was  tender 
and  true  of  heart.  He  was  proud,  not  haughty.  His  pride  was  that 
of  conscious  nobility,  and  rectitude.  He  loved  God,  loved  man, 
loved  truth;  and  he  served  God,  served  man,  served  truth.  He 
hated  evil,  wrong,  falseness,  meanness,  and  he  made  war  on  them 
always.  He  was  unflinching  in  his  devotion  to  principle — uncom 
promising  in  his  conflict  with  the  wrong.  He  was  pure  and  virtu 
ous  in  life,  reverent  toward  goodness  and  purity,  but  contemptuous 
toward  bigotry  and  shams.  He  had  the  courage  of  his  convictions, 
and  practised  rigidly  what  he  believed.  He  was  generous  in  his 
sympathies,  warm  in  his  friendships,  ardent  in  his  love.  There 
was  no  malice  in  his  nature.  Open  and  frank  in  his  intercourse, 
helpful  in  conduct,  his  example  and  teaching  were  an  inspiration. 
His  great  aim  was  to  live  a  noble  life  himself,  and  aid  others  to 
live  such  a  life.  His  ideal  standard  of  living  was  more  divine  than 
human,  and  his  struggle  was  to  attain  his  ideal.  He  may  have  been 
faulty ;  who  is  perfect  ?  He  may  have  been  harsh  in  his  judgments 
at  times;  but  it  was  not  because  his  nature  was  harsh.  He  was 


Teacher  and  Pupil  17 

condemnation.  He  was  not  a  church  member,  his 
manner  was  not  reverential,  he  had  little  regard  for  the 
outward  formalities  of  the  church,  and  therefore  was 
the  more  easily  branded  an  "infidel."  The  issue 
between  him  and  the  minister  was  well  defined  and 
undisguised.  The  minister  proclaimed  him  a  heretic. 
He  proclaimed  the  minister  a  bigot  and  attacked  what 
the  minister  preached  as  religion  with  all  the  weapons 
at  his  command.  Argument,  invective,  ridicule,  satire 
he  used  unsparingly.  The  church  members  and  the 
whole  community  other  than  the  Abolitionists  sided 
with  the  minister.  Mr.  Gunn  was  stigmatized  as  an 
Abolitionist  and  an  infidel — words  of  intense  reproach, 
the  import  of  which  we  now  but  feebly  realize. 

The  story  of  how  the  ''Master  of  the  Gunnery," 
after  persecution  and  exile,  established  and  maintained 
in  Washington  a  school  for  boys  which  shed  a  beneficent 
influence  of  incalculable  extent  and  power  so  that  when 
he  died  in  1881  he  was  followed  to  the  grave  by  such 
grief  and  blessings  as  followed  Dr.  Arnold  of  Rugby, 
belongs  to  other  pages  than  these.  Only  that  is  writ 
ten  of  him  here  which  helps  to  interpret  the  wholesome 
and  inspiring  surroundings  of  Orville  H.  Platt's  early 
life ;  and  who  can  estimate  the  noble  influence  upon  the 
mind  of  a  clean  and  whole-hearted  boy,  with  a  natural 
love  for  woods,  streams,  and  fields,  exerted  by  close 

gentle  and  tender  as  a  woman;  but  in  the  championship  of  the  weak 
he  struck  harder  than  he  thought.  He  was  unambitious,  careless  of 
worldly  honors,  indifferent  to  wealth  or  fame.  Had  he  chosen  he 
could  have  easily  filled  a  larger  place  in  the  world's  notice.  He 
neither  achieved  nor  sought  success  as  the  world  measures  success; 
but  he  realized  the  great  aim  of  his  life  in  that  he  lived  and  died 
a  true  man,  and  impressed  on  many  lives  the  seal  of  a  sterling 
manhood." — From  Mr.  Platt's  "Memorial"  in  The  Master  of  the 
Gunnery. 


i8  Orville  H.  Platt 

association  with  this  open-minded,  nature-loving,  man- 
loving  instructor  of  youth. 

Orville  Platt  first  became  a  pupil  of  Mr.  Gunn's  in 
1840  when  he  was  thirteen  years  old;  and  during  the 
next  eight  years  he  enjoyed  the  closest  relations  with 
his  teacher.  First  he  attended  the  Academy,  near  the 
Meeting- House,  on  the  Green,  and  when  one  by  one  the 
church  members  and  followers  of  Parson  Hayes  with 
drew  their  children  from  the  school,  the  son  of  Daniel 
Platt,  the  Abolitionist,  remained. 

At  school,  his  favorite  study  was  mathematics;  but 
he  was  fond  of  ancient  and  modern  history  and  of 
geography,  and  studied  Latin,  but  not  Greek.  He  is 
said  by  a  school-fellow  to  have  been  "correct  in  his 
phrasing,  accurate  in  pronunciation,  and  choice  in  his 
English."  He  never  violated  the  school  rules,  and 
he  was  of  a  serious  nature,  bent  on  making  the  most  of 
his  opportunities.  He  joined  in  outdoor  sports.  At 
baseball  he  was  a  good  runner  and  catcher,  but  "when 
it  came  to  hitting  the  ball,  he  lunged  at  it  with  terrific 
force."  In  football  he  is  described  as  a  "towering, 
dominating  figure.  Sometimes  he  could  be  tripped  or 
outgeneralled;  but  once  under  way,  the  ball  in  advance, 
he  followed  it  up  with  tempestuous  force."  He  could 
beat  all  the  other  boys  at  a  standing  jump  and  had  a 
record  of  twelve  feet  to  his  credit.  He  is  remembered 
as  having  always  been  fair  and  square  in  the  school 
boy  games.  "If  he  accidentally  stepped  on  or  rolled 
over  anybody  he  was  as  sorry  as  his  limping  or  disabled 
competitor  could  be." 

Through  allegiance  to  an  ideal,  Mr.  Gunn's  first 
school  in  Judea  was  ruined.  At  the  end  of  four  years 
the  number  of  his  pupils  was  reduced  to  nine — all 
children  of  Abolitionists.  Mr.  Gunn  was  forbidden 


Teacher  and  Pupil  19 

the  use  of  the  Academy  building,  and  moved  his  little 
school  to  the  house  of  his  sister,  Mrs.  Canfield,  on  the 
site  of  which  the  Gunnery  now  stands.  In  1845,  some 
friends  in  New  Preston,  who  remembered  his  success 
there  as  a  teacher  and  who  sympathized  with  him  in  his 
persecution,  determined  to  "show  Judea  that  Mr. 
Gunn  could  teach  school  in  New  Preston  even  if  he  was 
an  Abolitionist."  They  invited  him  to  return  and  he 
did  so.  His  enemies  in  Judea  tried  every  device  to 
prevent  parents  from  sending  their  children  to  a  school 
taught  by  a  "  heretic  and  an  infidel,"  and  some  were 
dissuaded;  but  many  Abolitionists  from  surrounding 
towns  sent  their  sons  and  daughters  to  New  Preston 
and  this  made  the  school  a  success. 

Orville  Platt  attended  the  school  for  three  winters, 
living  for  two  winters  with  Mr.  Gunn .  The  third  winter 
he  himself  taught  at  the  schoolhouse  on  Christian 
Street,  aptly  named,  according  to  tradition,  because  at 
one  time  every  house  on  the  street  was  owned  by  a 
professed  Christian .  For  this  he  received  eleven  dollars 
a  month  and  "boarded  around"  after  the  manner  of 
the  district  school  teacher  of  the  day — making  his  head 
quarters  at  the  house  of  the  chairman  of  the  district 
committee  who  employed  him,  and  who  took  him  in 
when  the  family  to  which  he  happened  to  be  assigned 
for  a  week  were  so  poor  he  did  not  care  to  board  with 
them. 

In  1847,  Mr.  Gunn  abandoned  New  Preston,  at  the 
urgency  of  friends  who  had  settled  inTowanda,  Pennsyl 
vania.  To  wan  da  was  the  home  of  David  Wilmot,  the 
author  of  the  Wilmot  Proviso .  The  Abolition  sentiment 
was  strong  and  to  be  an  Abolitionist  did  not  subject 
one  to  reproach.  He  became  principal  of  a  large  school 
there;  but  before  leaving  New  Preston  he  persuaded 


20  Orville  H.  Platt 

young  Platt  to  accompany  him  as  assistant.  Mr. 
Platt,  then  twenty  years  old,  spent  one  winter  at 
Towanda.  It  was  an  eventful  winter  for  him,  for  it 
brought  him  in  contact  with  the  young  woman  who  was 
to  become  his  wife,  and  with  whom  he  was  destined  to 
spend  forty-three  years  of  his  life  —  Miss  Annie  Bull,  the 
only  daughter  of  one  of  the  leading  families  of  Towanda 
with  whom  Mr.  Platt  made  his  home.  They  were 
married  May  15,  1850.  They  had  two  sons,  one  of 
whom  died  in  infancy.  The  other,  James  P.  Platt,  is 
now  a  judge  on  the  Federal  bench. 

In  the  spring  of  1848,  Mr.  Platt  returned  to  Judea, 
and  began  the  study  of  the  law.  He  had  the  privilege 
of  reading  under  Gideon  H.  Hollister  of  Litchfield,  one 
of  the  recognized  legal  authorities  of  the  day.  It  was 
no  child's  play;  for  he  was  obliged  to  read  Blackstone 
and  the  other  standard  works  at  home  and  then  drive 
or  walk  over  to  Litchfield,  twelve  miles  away,  to  recite 
to  Mr.  Hollister,  whom  he  surprised  one  day  by  repeat 
ing  from  memory  the  long  opening  chapterof  Blackstone 
without  a  break. 

During  the  winter  of  1848,  he  taught  in  the  Academy 
on  the  Green  and  he  seems  to  have  eked  out  his  salary 
as  teacher  by  private  instruction.  The  returns  were 
not  dazzling,  if  we  may  judge  from  the  following 
receipted  bill  which  has  come  down  to  us: 

Truman  Woodruff,  to  O.  H.  Platt,  Dr., 

To  tuition  of  John,  n  weeks  ..............  $2  .96 

Incidental  expenses  ...................  .  3  7  J 


Rec'd  payment,  March  2d,  1849. 

O.  H.  PLATT. 


Teacher  and  Pupil  21 

However,  he  was  able  to  lay  by  a  little  money,  and 
we  find  him  in  the  spring  abandoning  this  means  of  live 
lihood  and  taking  up  his  residence  in  Litchfield  where 
he  entered  Mr.  Hollister's  office.  In  the  spring  of  1850 
he  was  admitted  to  the  Litchfield  County  Bar  and  im 
mediately  went  back  to  Towanda  to  be  married.  For 
a  time  after  his  marriage  it  was  a  question  whether  he 
would  make  his  permanent  home  in  Towanda  or  not. 
For  six  months  he  was  in  the  office  of  Ulysses  S.  Mer- 
cur,  afterwards  Chief -Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  of 
Pennsylvania,  and,  at  the  end  of  that  period,  he  was  ad 
mitted  to  practice  in  the  Pennsylvania  courts.  The 
home  call  was  too  strong,  however,  and  shortly  after 
his  admission  to  the  Pennsylvania  Bar  he  concluded  to 
return  to  Connecticut.  He  lived  with  his  father,  while 
looking  about  the  State  to  determine  where  he  should 
settle  as  a  lawyer. 

Bearing  letters  of  recommendation  from  Senator- 
Truman  Smith  and  others,  to  Judge  Eleazar  K.  Foster 
and  James  Donaghe,  then  Collector  of  Customs  at  New 
Haven,  he  sought  their  advice,  and  followed  it  by  locat 
ing  at  Meriden,  a  rising  industrial  town,  twenty  miles 
north  of  New  Haven.  On  December  i,  1850,  he  went 
to  Meriden  and  engaged  an  office  which  had  to  be 
fitted  up  for  him.  While  waiting  for  the  office  to  be 
completed  he  returned  to  Judea,  spending  the  winter 
with  his  father.  He  went  to  Meriden  finally  in  the 
spring  of  1851,  to  begin  the  active  practice  of  the  law.1 

i  In  the  summer  of  1902,  in  order  that  his  granddaughter  might 
know  something  of  his  early  life,  Mr.  Platt  dictated  the  following, 
at  Mrs.  Platt's  request:  "I  was  born  July  19,  1827,  in  the  house 
which  stood  on  the  left-hand  side  of  the  road  leading  from  Black- 
ville  to  Davies  Hollow,  some  fifty  rods  beyond  the  old  Samuel 
Baldwin  place.  Only  the  cellar  remains,  and  that  is  filled  with 
small  trees  which  have  grown  since  the  house  was  torn  down.  The 


22  Orville  H.  Platt 

So  he  left  the  haunts  of  his  boyhood  to  enter  the  ac 
tivities  of  the  world ;  but  the  time  never  came  that  his 
heart  did  not  turn  toward  the  familiar  places  in  Judea. 
After  all,  that  was  his  home;  he  loved  to  dwell  upon 
its  beauties  and  charm,  and  many  a  time  his  wandering 

property  is  now  owned  by  Charles  C.  Ford,  and  with  his  permission 
I  have  transplanted  a  young  ash,  which  is  growing  finely  on  my 
lawn  at  Kirby  Corner.  The  barn  formerly  connected  with  the 
house  is  still  standing.  The  road  on  which  the  homestead  stood 
was  known  as  'Sabbaday  Lane,'  possibly,  because  it  led  to  the 
First  Episcopal  Church  in  Washington,  which  stood  in  Davies 
Hollow  near  the  little  old  burying-ground. 

"My  father  was  Daniel  G.  Platt,  and  my  mother  was  Almyra 
Hitchcock  Platt,  whose  family  lived  in  Bethlehem.  When  I  was 
born  my  father  was  a  farmer  and  taught  school  in  winter.  I 
remember  he  took  me  with  him  as  a  child,  one  day,  to  the  school- 
house  which  stood  on  the  Canfield  place  nearly  opposite  the  entrance 
to  Arthur  Woodruff's  lot.  This  building  was  removed  to  the  site 
now  occupied  »by  the  town  hall  on  the  Green,  and  was  fitted  up  and 
became  what  was  known  as  the  '  Old  Red  School  House. ' 

"When  I  was  perhaps  two  years  old,  my  father  moved  to  what 
is  now  the  Aspinwall  place,  the  property  then  being  owned  by  the 
daughters  of  Matthew  Mitchell,  who  was,  I  think,  a  brother  of 
Elnathan  Mitchell.  They  lived  in  South  Britain,  and  my  father 
rented  the  farm  from  them  on  shares.  It  extended  on  the  north 
to  the  road  leading  to  Blackville,  known  as  '  Goose  Hill, '  embracing 
all  the  land  south  of  a  line  drawn  from  there  to  the  road  running 
north  from  Powell  G.  Seeley's,  being  bounded  on  the  north  by 
Nelson  and  Charles  Ford's  land.  It  also  embraced  the  lots  south 
of  the  Aspinwall  place  (called  in  my  boyhood  the  'Punishment 
Lots '),  as  well  as  the  land  owned  now  by  Charles  Daignan,  on  which 
is  situated  the  reservoir  from  which  water  is  brought  to  the  Green. 

"I  have  sometimes  wondered  whether  the  'hills  standing  round 
about  it '  made  our  forefathers  name  our  part  of  the  town  Judea — 
it  looks  down  on  the  beautiful  valley  of  the  Shepaug,  and  the  whole 
country  is  full  of  running  brooks.  The  first  time  I  went  fishing,  I 
was  about  four  years  old — my  tackle  was  a  common  string,  with  a 
bent  up  pin  for  hook,  and  I  landed  one  small  shiner,  as  Miss  Julia 
Canfield  sat  beside  me  on  the  bank. 

"  I  lived  at  the  Aspinwall  place,  working  on  the  farm  (after  I  was 
old  enough)  until  the  year  1847,  an^  first  attended  school  in  the 
Old  Red  School  House  on  the  Green,  but  cannot  tell  whether  my 


Teacher  and  Pupil  23 

feet  strayed  back  to  the  Litchfield  hills,  where  every 
house  and  every  field  had  its  reminiscence.  Above  all 
things  he  liked  to  roam  the  woods,  and  he  was  never 
so  happy  as  when  tramping  his  favorite  trails  and 
whipping  his  favorite  streams.  He  was  one  of  the  most 

first  teacher  was  Antoinette  Judson,  or  Sophia  Turner,  who  became 
Mrs.  Preston  Hollister.  I  know  it  was  taught  by  a  Mr.  Northrup 
also,  who  came  from  New  Milford.  Later,  I  went  to  the  Academy 
which  stood  on  the  rock  north  of  the  town  hall,  taught  by  a  Mr. 
Jennings  and  subsequently  by  Mr.  Gunn.  The  Academy,  under 
Mr.  Gunn's  tuition,  dwindled  in  attendance  on  account  of  the 
Abolition  troubles,  until  finally  he  did  not  attempt  to  teach  in 
the  Academy  building,  but  had  a  school  in  Mr.  Lewis  Canfield's 
house,  where  the  Gunnery  now  stands,  living  there  with  his  sister, 
Mrs.  Canfield.  The  schoolroom  was  small,  and  was  entered  from 
the  hall  by  the  front  door  as  it  now  exists.  I  think  there  were 
only  eleven  pupils.  I  do  not  recall  all  of  them — they  were  mostly 
sons  and  daughters  of  pronounced  Abolitionists. 

"After  a  while  Mr.  Gunn  abandoned  the  project  of  a  school  in  his 
sister's  house,  and  taught,  for  possibly  three  winters,  the  Academy 
in  New  Preston  which  I  attended,  living  with  him  at  Mrs.  Cogswell's 
for  two  winters,  the  third,  teaching  at  the  schoolhouse  on  Christian 
Street,  at  eleven  dollars  per  month,  boarding  around.  Abiel 
Lemon,  who  employed  me,  was  chairman  of  the  district  committee, 
and  his  house  was  headquarters,  i.  e.,  when  the  people  were  so 
poor  I  did  not  wish  to  board  with  them,  he  took  me  in. 

"The  next  fall,  1847,  I  went  with  Mr.  Gunn  to  Towanda,  Penn 
sylvania,  as  his  assistant  in  a  large  school  of  which  he  had  become 
principal.  Returning  in  the  spring  I  commenced  the  study  of 
law  with  Gideon  H.  Hollister  of  Litchfield,  going  up  there  to  recite 
to  Mr.  Hollister. 

"In  the  winter  of  1848,  I  taught  in  the  Academy  on  the  Green, 
Mr.  Gunn  still  being  in  Towanda.  The  following  spring  I  went  to 
Litchfield  permanently,  entering  Mr.  Hollister's  office,  which  was  a 
brick  building  on  the  east  side  of  South  Street ;  Judge  Seymour  had 
an  office  in  the  same  building. 

"  I  was  admitted  to  the  Litchfield  County  Bar  in  the  early  spring 
of  1850,  and  immediately  went  back  to  Towanda,  where  I  was 
married  on  May  1 5th  of  that  year. 

"  I  was  six  months  in  the  office  of  Ulysses  S.  Mercur,  who  was 
subsequently  Chief -Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  Pennsylvania. 

"It was  a  question  whether  I  would  settle  there  or  not.     At  the 


24  Orville  H.  Platt 

skilful  fishermen  anywhere  to  be  found.  He  knew  the 
haunts  and  habits  of  all  fish;  knew  just  how  to  lure  them, 
what  bait  to  use  in  varying  circumstances.  Yet  it 
made  little  difference  to  him  whether  he  was  lucky  in 
his  sport  or  not.  He  went  fishing  for  the  sake  of  going, 
for  the  pleasure  of  being  in  the  woods,  of  building  a 
fire  outdoors  to  cook  his  primitive  meal  of  bacon  and 
toasted  bread  and  coffee ;  of  loafing  under  the  trees  and 
by  the  brooks.  He  was  versed  in  the  lore  of  the  woods. 
He  loved  to  stroll  through  them  slowly,  picking  the 
leaves  and  blossoms  here  and  there,  examining  them 
and  classifying  them  in  his  mind.  He  knew  every 
tree,  every  shrub,  and  every  flower,  the  note  of  every 
bird,  the  ways  of  every  wild  thing,  animate  or  not.  A 
little  later  in  life  the  call  of  the  forest  carried  him 
farther  away  from  civilization  to  the  Adirondacks  and 
to  fishing  grounds  in  Canada.  In  the  Adirondacks, 
near  Long  Lake,  he  built  him  a  shanty  which  he  called 
a  camp,  under  the  shadow  of  Mt.  Seward,  a  seven-mile 
row  to  the  post-office,  and  an  all-day  ride  by  buckboard 
to  the  nearest  railroad.  To  this  spot,  for  many  years 
up  to  the  last  summer  of  his  life,  he  hurried  just  as  soon 
as  he  could  get  away  from  the  grinding  work  of  legis 
lation.  There  he  lived  as  close  to  nature  as  he  could 
get.  Five  years  of  his  life,  he  said  once  near  the  end 
of  it,  he  had  spent  outdoors  in  the  woods.  In  these 
surroundings  he  passed  happy  days.  The  guides  all 
loved  him  as  one  of  their  own.  No  matter  how  ill  or 

end  of  six  months  I  was  admitted  to  practice  in  the  courts  of  that 
State,  and  then  concluded  to  return  to  Connecticut,  bringing  my 
wife  with  me.  My  father  in  the  meantime  had  moved  from  the 
Aspinwall  place  to  the  house  which  he  had  built  upon  a  small  farm 
on  the  Litchfield  road,  next  beyond  what  is  now  known  as  the 
'Mason  place,'  and  I  went  there  and  began  to  look  about  that  I 
might  decide  where  to  settle  as  a  lawyer  in  Connecticut." 


Teacher  and  Pupil  25 

useless  he  might  feel  on  leaving  the  Capital,  no  sooner 
would  he  approach  the  familiar  scenes  than  his  spirits 
would  begin  to  revive;  and  when  he  reached  the  camp 
and  the  familiar  shanty  he  seemed  to  shed  like  an 
uncomfortable  coat  the  melancholy  with  which  at  such 
seasons  he  was  too  frequently  oppressed.  With  Charlie 
Long,  Steve  Lamos,  or  Charlie  Sabbatis,  the  guides,  he 
would  fall  at  once  unconsciously  into  the  vernacular, 
asking  for  all  the  trifling  history  of  the  little  community 
in  the  woods  and  swapping  stories  and  experiences  with 
as  keen  a  zest  as  though  that  were  the  only  existence 
he  ever  knew.  He  would  hardly  unpack  his  baggage 
before  he  was  swinging  through  the  forest  with  sweeping 
strides  as  happy  and  hopeful  as  a  boy.  No  matter 
how  much  under  the  weather  he  might  have  been  there 
was  no  further  need  for  doctors  or  attendants.  He  was 
back  with  nature  once  more,  communing  on  terms  of 
equality  with  the  denizens  of  the  wild. 

Mr.  Platt  was  twice  married.  The  wife  of  his  youth 
was  for  many  years  an  invalid,  requiring  his  constant 
watchfulness  and  care,  and  to  the  last  she  was  sustained 
and  comforted  by  a  considerate,  sympathetic  devotion 
such  as  is  rarely  seen.  When  she  died  in  November, 
1893,  he  felt  as  though  the  bottom  had  dropped  out  of 
his  world. 

Forty-three  years  of  married  life  have  passed  into 
memory  [he  wrote  nearly  a  year  later  to  a  boyhood 
friend].  It  has  been,  still  is,  hard  to  accustom  myself  to 
the  change,  hard  to  catch  on  again,  or  to  feel  that  any 
thing  is  left  for  me  but  waiting  for  my  time  to  come.  I 
try  to  meet  things  as  a  courageous  man  should,  but  I 
cannot  get  above  the  feeling  that  I  must  plod  on  alone 
henceforth. 

The  next  years  of  his  life  were  the  most  gloomy  that 


26  Orville  H.  Platt 

he  had  ever  known,  and  nothing  but  the  necessity  for 
constant  attention  to  his  duties  in  the  Senate  carried 
him  through.  Then  came  a  change  which  broadened 
the  current  of  the  stream.  When  he  was  studying  law 
in  Litchfield,  one  of  his  friends  and  counsellors  was 
Truman  Smith,  for  many  years  in  Congress,  and  United 
States  Senator  from  1849  to  1854.  A  daughter,  Jeannie 
P.  Smith,  had  known  him  then  and  looked  up  to  him 
from  a  distance  as  a  young  man  grown.  They  lost  sight 
of  each  other,  one  wedded,  going  to  Meriden,  the  other 
to  Washington  B.C.,  and  afterwards  to  Stamford.  She 
became  the  wife  and  then  the  widow  of  George  A.  Hoyt, 
a  successful  man  of  business  and  affairs.  Later  they 
were  brought  together  again.  For  several  years  they 
had  neighboring  camps  in  the  Adirondacks,  and  the  two 
families  became  devoted  friends.  She  was  a  woman 
of  travel,  and  culture,  and  familiar  with  public  affairs, 
and  it  was  not  strange  that  they  should  be  drawn  to 
one  another.  On  April  29,  1897,  they  were  married  and 
the  new  alliance,  coming  at  the  dawn  of  a  period  when 
great  and  absorbing  issues  were  to  compel  his  attention, 
was  of  a  value  to  the  Senator  which  it  is  not  easy  now 
to  calculate.  To  the  end  he  rested  unquestioningly 
and  with  a  feeling  of  relief  upon  her  cheerful  counsel  and 
assistance.  One  service  she  rendered  for  which  those 
who  cared  for  him  must  ever  be  grateful.  She  built 
him  a  house  at  Kirby  Corner  near  one  of  his  favorite 
spots  in  Judea.  The  two  entered  into  the  joy  of  plan 
ning  and  furnishing  it  with  as  much  delight  as  though 
they  were  to  have  unending  years  of  pleasure  there. 
At  Kirby  Corner  in  the  last  stage  he  passed  days  of  rare 
contentment  and  there  he  welcomed  the  end. 


CHAPTER  III 

MERIDEN 

Meriden  and  the  First  Church — Twenty-eight  Years  a  Practising 
Lawyer — A  Political  Organizer — Judge  of  Probate — Chairman 
of  American  and  Republican  State  Committees — Secretary 
of  State — A  Member  of  the  General  Assembly — Speaker  of 
the  House — "Picture  Platt" — State's  Attorney — The  Bible 
Class — Masonry — The  Metabetchouan  Fishing  and  Game  Club 
— Interest  in  Business  Development — Financial  Reverses. 

WHEN  the  young  lawyer  arrived  in  Meriden  in  the 
spring  of  1851,  he  found  a  thriving  town  of 
3,000  people.  He  lived  there  twenty-eight  years,  be 
fore  he  was  sent  to  the  Senate ;  and  up  to  the  day  of  his 
death,  it  was  his  legal  residence  and  voting  place, 
although  his  winters  were  passed  in  Washington  and 
his  summers  either  in  the  Adirondack  woods  or  in  the 
quiet  seclusion  of  Judea. 

Wherever  he  might  go,  his  interest  in  the  progress  of 
Meriden  went  with  him.  There  was  the  home  he  had 
earned  by  years  of  practice  at  the  law;  there  was  the 
church  of  which  he  early  became  a  member;  there  were 
the  friends  of  his  young  manhood  who  had  helped  him 
to  his  first  political  success.  He  saw  the  village 
multiply  in  population  and  industry  almost  beyond 
the  recognition  of  his  early  days,  and  the  time  never 
came  when  he  did  not  look  forward  with  pleasure  to 
the  home-coming  at  the  close  of  each  session  of 
Congress. 

27 


28  Orville  H.  Platt 

His  law  office  at  first  was  on  Colony  Street,  in  a  brick 
building  owned  by  Aim  on  Andrews,  since  destroyed 
by  fire  and  rebuilt  and  now  owned  by  the  Grand 
Army  of  the  Republic. 

When  I  first  went  to  Meriden  [Mr.  Platt  said  three 
years  before  his  death]  I  boarded  with  Doctor  Hough, 
whose  house  stood  upon  the  ground  now  occupied  by  the 
First  National  Bank;  afterwards,  I  boarded  with  Mr. 
Morgan,  and  later  went  to  housekeeping.  The  first  law 
business  I  did  was  to  draw  five  warranty  deeds  for  Mr. 
Andrews,  of  whom  I  rented  my  office,  for  which  I  received 
one  dollar  and  twenty-five  cents. 

He  thus  began  humbly  like  any  other  briefless  young 
lawyer  entering  as  a  stranger  into  the  life  of  a  small 
though  busy  community.  For  the  first  year  or  so 
cases  were  few  and  unremunerative.  He  had  so  much 
time  on  his  hands  that  he  was  always  available  for  the 
recreations  of  the  village,  and  ready  to  accept  an  invi 
tation  to  a  game  of  checkers  or  chess.  Many  a  day  he 
would  shut  up  his  office  and  go  fishing.  Some  of  his 
old  associates  say  he  would  do  this  even  though  he 
happened  to  be  in  the  midst  of  a  case;  but  a  better 
version  seems  to  be  that  he  did  not  have  enough  cases 
to  interfere  with  his  fishing.1 

i  In  the  early  years  of  his  life  in  Meriden,  Mr.  Platt  with  a  number 
of  other  young  professional  and  business  men  of  the  county  or 
ganized  a  baseball  club  which  used  to  play  on  the  old  hospital 
grounds  at  New  Haven.  It  is  said  to  have  been  the  first  attempt 
in  the  State  of  Connecticut  to  play  the  national  game  under  sys 
tematic  rules.  The  club  was  divided  into  two  nines  which  played 
against  each  other  two  or  three  times  a  week,  and  in  the  list  of 
the  players  appear  names  which  later  became  well  known.  One 
was  N.  D.  Sperry,  Secretary  of  the  Republican  National  Committee 
at  the  time  of  Lincoln's  first  election,  a  financial  backer  of  Ericsson 
in  the  building  of  the  Monitor,  and  for  many  years  a  member  of 
Congress.  Another  was  Alfred  H.  Terry,  afterwards  Major-General 


Meriden  29 

But  it  did  not  take  long  to  establish  friendly  relations 
with  the  substantial  citizens  of  the  village,  and  within 
two  years  of  his  arrival  he  stood  so  well  that  he  was 
elected  Judge  of  Probate,  a  position  which  he  occupied 
from  1853  to  1856.  Whatever  may  have  been  his  early 

Terry,  the  hero  of  Fort  Fisher,  and  a  famous  Indian  fighter.  Fifty 
years  later  on  the  occasion  of  a  reception  tendered  Mr.  Sperry  at 
New  Haven,  Mr.  Platt  wrote  from  his  country  home : 

"  WASHINGTON,  CONNECTICUT, 

September  29,  1903. 
"DEAR  MR.  SPERRY: 

"  I  am  invited  to  come  down  and  attend  the  reception  to  be  given 
you  on  the  fifteenth  of  October  and  have  been  wondering  what  I 
can  say  about  you.  It  occurs  to  me  that  I  would  like  to  tell  the 
story  of  our  baseball  game,  and  I  wish  that  you  would  write  me  the 
names  of  as  many  of  those  who  took  part  as  you  can  recollect.  I 
am  unable  to  recall  all  of  them  for  certain,  but  will  give  you  those 
I  can. 

"  There  must  have  been  two  nines — eighteen  in  all: 
Yourself,  Myself, 

General  Terry,  Harry  Lewis, 

Mont  Woodward,  J.  B.  Candee, 

William  E.  Downs,  Arthur  D.  Osborne, 

Dave  Peck,  Clark  from  Hamden, 

Dwight  (was  it  not?),  Tall  man,  captain  of  Blues  or 

Greys,  whose  name   escapes 
me. 

"Possibly  Kellogg  was  there;  I  rather  think  he  was;  perhaps 
Wooster,  Theodore  Buell,  and  Major  Bissell  were,  and  I  think 
John  Woodruff  was. 

"  Was  Root,  of  the  clock  shop,  one  of  them,  and  John  C.  Hollister 
another? 

"  If  I  am  right  about  these,  we  have  the  eighteen,  but  as  I  cannot 
be  positive,  I  wish  that  you  would  put  on  your  thinking  cap  and 
complete  the  two  nines.  The  game  was  played  on  the  lot  where 
the  New  Haven  hospital  now  stands,  was  it  not  ? 

"  Do  you  remember  who  were  pitchers  and  who  were  catchers, 
or  anything  else  about  it  which  would  be  interesting  to  such  a 
gathering?" 

Mr.  Sperry  helped  to  complete  the  nines  for  him  as  follows: 
"The  tall  man  you  mention  must  have  been  Captain  Charles 


30  Orville  H.  Platt 

disposition  there  is  no  doubt  about  the  strictness  with 
which  he  attended  to  business  from  the  time  he  first 
entered  public  office;  and  the  habits  of  those  days 
remained  with  him  to  the  end, — habits  of  patient, 
scrupulous,  almost  plodding  industry.  He  began  im 
mediately  to  take  an  active  part  in  politics.  An 
Abolition  Whig  and  Free-Soiler — his  first  vote  had 
been  cast  for  Van  Buren  in  1848 — he  undertook  the 
work  of  extending  the  Abolition  sentiment  in  the 
community.  The  lessons  instilled  in  him  in  boyhood 
by  the  little  band  of  friends  of  freedom  in  Judea  were 
not  forgotten.  His  arrival  in  Meriden  almost  coincided 
with  the  inception  of  the  Kansas- Nebraska  struggle, 
which  colored  national  politics  for  the  next  decade, 
and  it  was  inevitable  that  one  so  trained  and  so  en 
dowed  should  participate  to  the  best  of  his  endeavor 
in  the  political  activities  of  his  limited  environment.1 

T.  Candee,  the  father  of  Everett  Candee  of  the  Street  Railway 
Company.  On  the  whole  as  I  think  the  matter  over  perhaps 
Kellogg  was  a  member.  Wooster  was  not.  Theodore  Buell  was 
not.  Major  Bissell  was  not.  John  Woodruff  used  to  be  with  us 
once  in  a  while  and  perhaps  Root,  of  the  clock  shop,  but  they  were 
not  regular  members.  John  C.  Hollister  was  a  member.  " 

i  The  responsibilities  of  active  political  organization,  which  were 
undertaken  elsewhere  by  the  Free-Soil  party,  were  assumed  in 
Connecticut  largely  by  the  American  party,  which  in  the  early 
days  embodied  the  living  Anti-Slavery  spirit  of  the  State.  Mr. 
Platt  accordingly  became  identified  with  the  American  movement, 
together  with  N.  D.  Sperry  and  a  few  other  earnest  young  men  who 
afterwards  figured  prominently  in  Republican  politics.  He  became 
Chairman  of  the  State  Committee  of  the  American  party  prior  to 
1856  and  retained  the  chairmanship  in  1856,  working  in  harmony 
with  the  Republican  State  Committee  when  the  State  chose  Fremont 
electors.  A  little  later  he  became  Chairman  of  the  Republican  State 
Committee  and  he  was  Secretary  of  State  during  the  administration 
of  Governor  Holley  in  1857-8,  having  previously  served  as  clerk 
of  the  State  Senate  in  1855-6. 

To  Philip  E.  Howard  of  Philadelphia,  who  inquired  about  the 


Meriden  31 

From  that  time  until  his  election  to  the  Senate,  he 
was  one  of  the  most  effective  party  workers  in  the  State, 
and  one  of  the  best  political  organizers.  He  had  a 
rare  faculty  of  quiet  control,  and  then,  as  later,  his  word 
went  far.  The  story  of  his  slow  but  steady  growth 
in  political  favor  during  the  twenty-eight  years  of  his 
stay  in  Meriden,  of  the  gradual  expansion  of  his  reputa 
tion  and  acquaintance  to  county  and  state  limits, 
found  its  parallel  on  a  national  scale  between  the  time 
of  his  election  to  the  Senate  and  the  enactment  of  the 
Platt  amendment.  From  first  to  last,  without  self- 
advertising  or  spectacular  devices,  his  development 


connection  of  Henry  Clay  Trumbull  with  Connecticut  politics 
before  the  war,  Mr.  Platt  wrote  on  September  i,  1904 :  "  I  remember 
the  fact  of  Mr.  Trumbull' s  activity  in  those  times;  remember  to 
have  heard  him  make  political  speeches,  and  some  of  the  anecdotes 
with  which  they  were  interspersed,  but  my  personal  intercourse 
and  friendship  for  him  dates  from  rather  a  later  period.  I  was 
originally  a  '  Know-Nothing'  and  belonged  to  what  was  called  the 
'American  party,'  so  that  at  the  organization  of  the  Republican 
party  the  work  was  taken  up  by  others.  We  supported  Fremont 
with  all  our  might  in  1856.  I  had  been  Chairman  of  the  American, 
or  American-Union  party,  as  we  called  ourselves  prior  to  1856, 
and  perhaps  in  1856  we  had  a  double  organization  —  I  cannot 
remember — that  is,  two  committees — and  it  is  possible  that  I  still 
retained  the  chairmanship  of  the  American  party  in  1856,  working 
in  harmony  with  the  State  Committee  of  the  Republican  party,  then 
just  organized.  We  carried  Connecticut  in  1856  for  Fremont,  and 
I  know  that  Mr.  Trumbull  was  very  active  at  that  time.  I  cannot 
make  it  seem  true  that  he  was  ever  a  member  of  a  State  committee 
of  which  I  was  chairman.  After  1858  I  was  Chairman  of  the  Re 
publican  State  Committee  for  two  or  three  years.  Unfortunately, 
I  have  no  memoranda  or  data  from  which  I  could  refresh  my  recol 
lection.  My  memory  is  of  that  peculiar  kind  that  when  a  particular 
piece  of  work  is  accomplished,  I  put  it  one  side  and  forget  all  about 
it  until  something  occurs  which  makes  it  necessary  for  me  to  recall 
it.  Others  seem  to  have  memory  which  retains  the  details  of  every 
thing  in  which  they  have  been  engaged,  or  with  which  they  have 
been  connected." 


32  Orville  H.  Platt 

was  constantly  upward  and  outward.  Judge  of 
Probate  for  Meriden;  Clerk  of  State  Senate;  Chairman 
of  American  and  Republican  State  committees;  Secre 
tary  of  State;  member  of  Senate;  member  of  State 
House  of  Representatives;  Speaker  of  House  of  Repre 
sentatives;  State's  Attorney  for  New  Haven;  United 
States  Senator — the  precise  dates  do  not  so  much 
matter. 

It  was  during  his  term  as  State  Senator  in  1861-2 
that  an  incident  occurred  which  brought  him  for  the 
moment  into  a  prominence  which  may  not  have  been 
altogether  agreeable.  There  was  in  Connecticut  a 
pervasive  Copperhead  sentiment  at  the  beginning  of 
the  War,  just  as  there  had  been  a  pro-slavery  sentiment 
there  during  the  Kansas-Nebraska  struggle,  when  one 
Connecticut  Senator,  Isaac  Toucey,  voted  with  the 
Democrats  of  the  South  against  Salmon  P.  Chase's 
amendment  to  Douglas's  Squatter  Sovereignty  bill: 
"Under  which,  the  people  of  the  Territory,  through 
their  appropriate  representatives,  may,  if  they  see  fit, 
prohibit  the  existence  of  slavery  therein."  Some  of 
the  leading  Democrats  of  the  State  loudly  vociferated 
their  lack  of  sympathy  with  the  steps  taken  to  save 
the  Union.  William  W.  Eaton  announced  that,  if 
any  Massachusetts  troops  crossed  Connecticut,  they 
would  have  to  do  it  over  his  dead  body.  One  of  the 
most  prominent  of  the  Copperheads  was  a  former 
Governor  of  the  State,  Thomas  H.  Seymour.  So  far 
had  the  declarations  of  these  men  spread,  that  friends 
of  the  Union  began  to  question  whether  a  false  impres 
sion  would  not  go  out  to  the  country  of  the  feeling  of 
the  State.  Mr.  Platt  was  one  of  the  younger  Senators, 
fired  with  the  zeal  of  early  convictions  brought  to  white 
heat  in  the  furnace  of  war.  He  felt  that  something 


Meriden  33 

should  be  done  to  emphasize  the  loyalty  of  Connecticut, 
and — whether  after  consultation  with  others  is  not 
known — he  introduced  a  resolution  reciting  the  cir 
cumstances  and  providing  that  the  portraits  of  Gover 
nor  Seymour  and  Governor  Toucey,  which  hung  in  the 
chamber  with  those  of  other  Governors,  should  be  turned 
to  the  wall.  The  resolution  was  adopted;  some  one 
dubbed  the  author  of  it  "Picture  Platt,"  and  thus  he 
was  called  for  many  years  by  the  opposition  press  in 
the  State.  The  incident  he  rarely  referred  to  in  after 
years,  and  the  details  of  it  seem  to  have  passed  out  of 
his  mind;  but  he  felt  that  his  action  was  fully  justified.1 
One  of  his  earliest  steps  after  establishing  his  home 
in  Meriden,  was  to  unite  with  the  First  Congregational 
Church.  He  continued  this  association  until  his  death, 
although  in  the  later  years  his  connection  was,  neces 
sarily,  not  active.  He  was  a  deacon  of  the  church  until 
he  left  for  Washington,  D.  C.  For  a  long  time  he  con 
ducted  a  Bible  class,  which  was  regarded  as  one  of 
the  institutions  of  the  place,  and  to  which  many  of  the 
principal  men  and  women  of  the  town  belonged.  His 
teachings  were  marked  by  earnestness  and  common- 
sense,  and  some  of  his  pupils  say  his  exposition  of  the 
Scriptures  often  seemed  inspired.  He  had  no  use  for 
cant.  His  son  recalls  that  once  when  he  was  home 
from  college  he  dropped  into  his  father's  office,  and 
they  started  for  a  walk.  As  they  passed  the  church, 
evangelistic  services  were  going  on,  and  the  father  said, 
1  'Let 's  go  in."  The  evangelist  was  exhorting  with 

»  "  I  think  it  was  Thomas  H.  Seymour  whose  portrait  was  removed 
from  the  Senate  chamber  on  my  motion — that  is  my  recollection 
of  it, — and  that  years  afterwards,  when  the  War  was  over,  it  was 
brought  back.  The  Democrats  have  never  forgiven  me  for  it  and 
never  will,  and  yet  I  think  it  was  an  entirely  justifiable  action." — 
Letter  of  O.  H.  Platt  to  A.  H.  Byington,  January  29,  1903. 

3 


34  Orville  H.  Platt 

great  fervor,  calling  down  the  terrors  of  eternal  punish 
ment  ;  after  he  had  been  laying  on  the  scourge  for  some 
time,  he  came  down  among  the  congregation,  and 
started  straight  down  the  aisle  to  where  the  elder 
Platt  was  sitting  at  the  head  of  a  pew,  with  his  legs 
crossed  as  usual.  Throwing  his  arm  over  Mr.  Plata's 
shoulder  he  asked,  "My  brother,  are  you  a  Christian?" 
The  future  Senator  looked  up  slowly,  without  uncrossing 
his  legs,  and  barely  unclosing  his  lips — "If  what  you 
have  been  telling  us  is  true  about  what  is  necessary  to 
be  a  Christian  and  what  is  not,"  he  said  deliberately, 
"I  don't  think  I  am!" 

Some  of  his  most  agreeable  associations  with  Meriden 
grew  out  of  his  interest  in  Masonry.  He  was  an  early 
member  of  Meridian  Lodge,  No.  77,  which  dated  from 
about  the  time  of  his  arrival  in  the  town,  and  later 
joined  in  the  institution  of  St.  Elmo  Commandery, 
No.  9,  K.  T.  Most  of  his  closest  friendships  had  their 
beginning  there,  and  throughout  his  life  he  always 
made  a  point  of  being  in  Meriden  if  possible  at  the 
ceremonies  on  Good-Friday  when  his  old  companions 
got  together.  He  delivered  addresses  on  the  fiftieth 
anniversary  of  Meridian  Lodge  and  the  twenty-fifth 
anniversary  of  St.  Elmo  Commandery,  which  bear 
the  marks  of  careful  preparation,  and  disclose  a  deep 
affection  for  the  order  to  which  he  belonged. 

Another  connection  dating  from  early  days  in  Meri 
den  was  his  membership  in  the  Metabetchouan  Fishing 
and  Game  Club,  which  had  a  fishing  preserve  in  Canada 
comprising  two  hundred  square  miles  of  territory.  He 
originally  leased  the  preserve,  as  he  used  to  explain, 
"in  the  days  when  I  was  young  and  foolish."  He  soon 
found  that  he  could  not  get  there  often  and  that  it 
was  more  than  he  could  afford  to  keep  up.  So  some  of 


A   FLY-CASTING    RAPID  OF  THE   SHEPAUG    RIVER 


Meriden  35 

his  friends  took  it  off  his  hands,  and  formed  a  club, 
building  a  clubhouse  in  the  unbroken  forest,  with 
camps  on  the  lakes  and  rivers.  Next  to  the  Litchfield 
hills  and  the  Adirondacks,  he  liked  to  go  there,  though 
it  rarely  happened  that  he  could  get  so  far  away. 

He  was  deeply  concerned  in  the  business  develop 
ment  of  his  town.  He  was  forever  urging  the  advan 
tage  of  establishing  new  industries,  and  this  interest 
of  his  resulted  not  long  before  his  election  to  the  Senate 
in  the  one  great  financial  setback  of  his  life.  A  number 
of  his  local  friends  undertook  to  establish  a  cutlery 
concern  and  he  became  the  counselling  spirit  in  the 
enterprise,  although  he  had  little  pecuniary  interest  in 
it.  He  worked  hard  to  get  it  started,  and  the  pro 
moters  came  to  him  to  go  on  their  notes.  He  accom 
modated  them  without  thinking  how  much  paper  he 
was  putting  his  name  to  and  got  in  beyond  his  depth. 
The  concern  failed  and  he  found  himself  involved  for 
nearly  $25,000.  He  turned  over  all  his  own  property 
and  part  of  his  wife's  property  to  the  creditors  of  the 
failed  concern.  While  he  was  in  the  worst  of  his 
trouble  he  received  from  his  brother  Simeon,  who  was 
a  farmer  in  Litchfield  County,  a  good-sized  check  with 
the  laconic  memorandum:  "Orville,  use  this."  He 
returned  the  check  with  an  equally  laconic  note : ' '  Much 
obliged,  Simeon,  but  I  got  myself  into  this  mess,  and  I 
shall  get  out  of  it."  But  he  never  did  quite  get  out  of 
it.  He  went  ahead  strictly  paying  every  dollar,  giving 
his  notes  where  he  could  not  pay  in  cash,  and  taking 
them  up  as  he  found  himself  able  to  do  so,  but  he 
carried  the  burden  up  to  the  day  of  his  death,  and  some 
of  the  notes  were  cancelled  only  when  it  came  to  the 
settlement  of  his  estate. 

He  was  not  a  jury  lawyer.     He  confined  himself 


36  Orville  H.  Platt 

almost  entirely  to  patent,  corporation,  and  real-estate 
law.  Until  1875,  he  was  alone  in  his  office.  Then  he 
took  into  partnership  his  son  James,  recently  graduated, 
and  for  many  years  the  old  sign,  "  O.  H.  &  J.  P.  PLATT," 
remained  on  the  office  door.  At  the  time  of  his  election 
to  the  Senate,  his  practice  was  the  most  extensive  in 
Meriden,  and  almost  all  the  important  manufacturing 
concerns  in  the  town  were  among  his  clients.  Every 
one  had  confidence  in  him.  Every  one  was  familiar 
with  his  tall  figure  sauntering  up  the  street  and  felt 
free  to  go  to  him  for  help  or  sympathy.  He  was  com 
monly  known  as  "O.  H."  and  few  took  the  pains  to 
call  him  by  any  other  name. 

The  years  of  his  stay  in  Meriden  were  not  eventful, 
but  they  served  to  give  him  an  acquaintance  through 
out  the  State  which  proved  of  value  when  he  came  be 
fore  the  Legislature  for  election  to  the  Senate.  He  was 
called  a  good  campaign  speaker,  and  was  in  demand 
for  political  occasions  in  his  own  town  and  in  others,  so 
that  people  got  in  the  habit  of  associating  his  name  with 
Republican  affairs.  It  was  known  among  his  friends 
that  he  had  only  one  ambition.  His  service  as  Secre 
tary  of  State  in  1858,  Speaker  of  the  House  of  Repre 
sentatives  in  1867,  and  State's  Attorney  for  New 
Haven  between  1877  and  1879,  came  along  in  the 
ordinary  course  of  politics.  He  could  have  been  chosen 
Governor  and  might  easily  have  been  elected  to  Congress, 
but  he  did  not  care  for  either  place.  There  was  only 
one  political  office  he  wanted  and  that  was  the  United 
States  Senatorship.  He  thought  that  with  his  tempera 
ment  and  training  he  could  do  better  work  in  the  Senate 
than  anywhere  else,  if  he  should  ever  have  the  opportun 
ity.  His  chance  came  at  last  in  the  fall  of  1878.  For 
several  years  Connecticut  had  been  in  the  control  of 


Meriden  37 

the  Democratic  party.  W.  W.  Eaton,  the  "peace 
Democrat"  of  Civil  War  days,  and  William  H.Barnum, 
afterwards  Chairman  of  the  Democratic  National  Com 
mittee,  represented  the  State  in  the  Senate,  having 
taken  the  places  made  vacant  by  the  death  of  Senators 
Buckingham  and  Ferry  in  1875.  Barnum's  term  was 
to  expire  on  March  4,  1879,  and  the  election  of  a 
Republican  Legislature  in  1878  opened  the  way  for  a 
Republican  successor. 


CHAPTER  IV 

THE  MIDNIGHT  CAUCUS 

A  Skilfully  Conducted  Canvass — The    Midnight  Caucus — Election 
to  the  Senate — Newspaper  Criticism — Reception  at  Meriden. 

THERE  is  no  more  interesting  chapter  in  the  political 
history  of  Connecticut  than  the  story  of  the 
campaign  for  the  Senatorship  which  culminated  in  the 
famous  midnight  caucus  of  January  16-17,  1879,  an<^ 
the  selection  of  Mr.  Platt  as  the  Republican  nominee. 
In  general  estimation,  Gen.  Joseph  R.  Hawley  was 
easily  the  leading  candidate,  and  outside  the  State  it 
seems  to  have  been  assumed  that  he  would  be  successful. 
He  had  acquired  a  wide  reputation  for  independence  and 
courage,  was  the  one  distinctly  national  character  in 
the  State,  and  was  understood  in  some  way  to  represent 
popular  sentiment  as  against  the  scheming  of  profes 
sional  politicians.  He  had  a  splendid  record  for  bravery 
in  the  Civil  War,  to  which  he  was  recognized  as  one 
of  the  State's  most  notable  contributions.  He  had 
been  Governor  of  the  State,  Permanent  Chairman  of  the 
Republican  National  Convention  in  1868,  a  Presidential 
Elector  in  the  same  year,  President  of  the  Centennial 
Commission  at  Philadelphia  in  1876.  At  the  election 
of  1878,  he  had  been  chosen  a  member  of  the  House  of 
Representatives  for  the  second  time,  after  an  interval 
of  several  years,  having  served  one  term  in  1871  and 
1872,  and  having  twice  suffered  defeat.  He  was  the 

38 


The  Midnight  Caucus  39 

editor  of  the  Hartford  C  our  ant,  a  strongly  appealing 
personality  both  in  the  State  and  out. 

Marshall  Jewell  likewise  had  a  reputation  extending 
beyond  the  limits  of  the  State,  of  which  he  had  been 
Governor  for  three  terms.  As  Minister  to  Russia,  and 
Postmaster-General  under  President  Grant,  as  a  con 
spicuous  figure  in  Republican  national  conventions, 
as  a  member  of  the  Republican  National  Committee, 
of  which  he  became  Chairman  in  the  following  year, 
he  had  many  friends  and  adherents.  He  was  strong 
especially  among  the  active  political  workers,  and, 
being  regarded  as  their  candidate,  suffered  accordingly. 

Henry  B.  Harrison  was  one  of  the  best-known  lawyers 
in  the  State,  frequently  mentioned  for  important  office, 
and  was  recognized  as  a  high-minded  man,  from  whom 
much  was  to  be  expected.  Into  this  group  of  eminent 
men,  the  modest  Meriden  lawyer  ventured  to  intrude 
himself  as  a  competitor  for  the  highest  honor  in  the 
gift  of  the  State.  He  had  seemingly  few  qualities  to 
commend  him  to  the  Legislature  in  preference  to  any 
one  of  the  others.  He  was. known,  it  is  true,  as  a 
competent  lawyer,  as  a  political  worker  and  organizer 
of  proved  astuteness,  as  an  efficient  public  servant  in 
the  various  positions  in  which  he  had  served,  and  as  a 
citizen  of  sterling  worth;  but  it  may  be  doubted,  when 
his  candidacy  was  announced,  whether  there  were 
many  who  imagined  he  would  be  a  serious  factor, 
much  less  that  he  could  secure  the  prize.  He  had  one 
advantage  which  those  who  interested  themselves  in 
his  candidacy  regarded  as  a  political  asset.  He  had 
no  enemies  and  nowhere  in  the  State  was  there  a 
politician  of  consequence  who  did  not  have  a  kindly 
feeling  for  him.  Though  the  was  the  first  choice  of 
few,  he  was  acceptable  as  a  second  choice  to  many. 


40  Orville  H.  Platt 

Moreover,  his  friends  figured  that  either  of  the  two 
leading  candidates,  Hawley  and  Jewell,  both  living 
in  Hartford,  would  prefer  to  see  the  Senatorship 
go  to  some  one  outside  of  Hartford  if  unable  to  get  it 
himself.  There  was  to  be  another  vacancy  at  the  end 
of  two  years,  when  the  term  of  Senator  Eaton  expired, 
and  the  election  of  a  Hartford  man  to  the  existing 
vacancy  would  be  a  serious  handicap  to  any  Hartford 
candidate  in  1881.  The  nucleus  of  Mr.  Platt's  support 
was  in  his  own  town  of  Meriden,  with  its  three  repre 
sentatives  in  the  Legislature,  H.  Wales  Lines  in  the 
Senate,  and  Samuel  Dodd  and  James  P.  Platt  in  the 
House.  A  campaign  committee  was  organized,  con 
sisting  of  H.  Wales  Lines,  Charles  L.  Rockwell,  Judge 
Levi  E.  Coe,  John  W.  Coe,  and  William  F.  Graham. 
Friends  of  the  candidate  were  assigned  each  to  canvass 
a  county  in  the  State,  while  a  score  or  more  other 
Meriden  men  volunteered  to  help  by  visiting  other 
towns  and  interviewing  members-elect  to  the  General 
Assembly.  It  was  the  plan  of  the  little  band  of  cam 
paigners  not  to  antagonize  any  of  the  other  candidates, 
to  stimulate  and  extend  the  friendly  feeling  already 
existing  toward  Mr.  Platt  in  all  parts  of  the  State,  to 
make  him  the  second  choice  of  as  many  members-elect 
as  possible,  so  that  when  the  time  came  for  either 
Hawley  or  Jewell  supporters  to  look  for  another  candi 
date,  they  would  naturally  turn  to  Platt.  Thus  his 
canvass  progressed  unobtrusively,  but  with  gradually 
accumulating  interest,  until  a  few  days  before  the  time 
for  the  Republican  caucus.  By  that  time  the  com 
mittee  had  some  twenty-five  votes  on  which  they 
thought  they  could  count — at  least  for  sympathetic 
support,  and  friends  of  other  candidates  began  to 
figure  on  the  Platt  following  as  something  to  be  seriously 


The  Midnight  Caucus  41 

considered.  At  the  beginning  of  the  canvass,  Mr. 
Platt  had  instructed  his  managers  that  they  should 
make  no  trades,  bargains,  or  combines  of  any  kind  with 
any  one.  Those  instructions  were  faithfully  carried 
out.  A  few  days  before  the  caucus,  however,  some  of 
Mr.  Platt's  friends  became  anxious.  There  were  rumors 
of  bargains  and  agreements.  One  proposition  was 
made,  that  the  Platt  support  should  go  to  one  of  the 
other  candidates  on  condition  that  Mr.  Platt  should  be 
chosen  Senator  two  years  later;  in  the  meantime,  the 
son  James  Platt  to  be  appointed  judge  on  the  State 
bench,  which  was  his  ambition.  All  these  suggestions 
were  rejected,  but  word  was  carried  to  the  candidate 
of  what  was  going  on,  with  a  suggestion  that  he  ought 
to  be  in  Hartford.  A  few  hours  before  the  caucus, 
Mr.  Lines,  the  Chairman  of  the  Platt  Campaign  Com 
mittee,  received  the  following  dispatch  at  Hartford: 

NEW  HAVEN,  CONNECTICUT, 
January  i4th. 

To  Honorable  H.  WALES  LINES, 

Senator  Sixth  District. 

My  duties  here  make  it  impossible  for  me  to  give  direction 
or  even  thought  to  the  senatorial  matter.  I  leave  it 
entirely  with  you  and  the  Meriden  representatives,  with 
these  suggestions:  Make  no  combinations  or  bargains,  and 
entertain  no  proposals  for  anything.  Let  no  friend  of  mine 
disparage  any  other  candidate.  Put  the  argument  solely 
on  what  you  may  think  of  me,  my  ability  to  represent  the 
State,  and  the  best  interests  of  the  Republican  party. 

O.  H.  PLATT. 

The  message  was  hardly  needed,  for  it  was  in  line  with 
what  Mr.  Platt's  managers  had  understood  his  wishes 
to  be.  It  was  not  made  public  until  some  time  after 


42  Orville  H.  Platt 

the  caucus,  and  then  it  helped  to  contribute  to  the 
satisfaction  with  which  the  people  of  the  State  were 
learning  to  contemplate  the  outcome  of  the  contest. 

The  caucus  began  at  eight  o'clock  and  remained 
continually  in  session  until  2:27  the  next  morning. 
Interest  was  intense.  Former  speaker  Bugbee  of 
Killingly  was  made  chairman  because  his  preference 
was  unknown.  Hawley's  friends  were  anxious  for 
nominating  speeches;  but  supporters  of  the  other 
candidates  at  a  meeting  before  the  caucus  decided 
that  no  speeches  should  be  made,  and  their  wishes 
prevailed.  On  the  first  ballot,  which  is  designated 
in  the  newspaper  reports  as  "informal"  but  which 
is  said  by  some  who  were  there  not  to  have  dif 
fered  in  character  from  the  others,  Hawley  had  49 
votes ;  Jewell  35 ;  Platt  24;  Harrison  14;  W.  T.  Minor 
of  Stamford  14;  P.  T.  Barnum  10.  Platt's  strong 
showing  on  this  ballot  was  a  surprise  to  all  except 
his  friends.  It  was  known  that  there  were  three,  and 
probably  five  who  would  stand  by  him  until  his  election 
or  defeat.  Three  of  these  came  from  Meriden.  There 
is  some  question  as  to  the  identity  of  the  others;  but 
honors  lie  with  two  of  the  following  names:  Senator 
Lyman  W.  Coe  and  Representative  Bradley  R. 
Agard  of  Torrington,  and  Representative  Henry  Gay 
of  Winchester.  Some  who  were  primarily  for  Platt 
favored  Hawley  as  second  choice  and  when  they  saw 
the  Jewell  vote  increasing  on  subsequent  ballots  they 
became  alarmed  lest  Jewell  should  be  nominated  and 
transferred  their  votes  to  Hawley.  So  it  came  about 
that  as  ballot  after  ballot  was  taken,  the  Platt  showing 
fell  steadily  till,  on  the  eighth  formal  ballot,  it  reached 
the  dauntless  five,  and  there  for  three  ballots  it  stuck, 
while  the  Harrison  strength  slowly  grew,  and  Hawley's 


The  Midnight  Caucus  43 

on  the  ninth  and  tenth  ballots  bounded  to  seventy-one, 
within  five  votes  of  the  nominating  point. 

On  the  tenth  formal  ballot,  Hawley  had  71  votes, 
Jewell  51,  Harrison  23,  and  Platt  5.  On  the  eleventh 
ballot,  Hawley  had  64,  Jewell  53,  Harrison  21,  and  Platt 
10.  From  that  time  the  Platt  strength  showed  a 
gradual  increase,  Harrison's  fell  away,  the  Jewell 
votes  disintegrated  ballot  after  ballot,  and  the  Hawley 
support  fluctuated.  It  was  evident  that  the  Jewell 
managers,  at  the  head  of  whom  was  William  H.  Hay- 
ward  of  Colchester,  were  trying  to  effect  combinations 
first  with  the  Harrison,  and  then  with  the  Platt  contin 
gents,  so  as  to  prevent  the  success  of  Hawley,  who  was 
approaching  dangerously  close  to  the  nomination. 
The  game  was  skilfully  played.  Enough  votes  were 
thrown  to  one  candidate  and  another  to  sustain  the 
contest,  but  the  transfer  of  strength  was  so  gradual 
as  not  to  precipitate  a  rush  to  Hawley.  At  midnight, 
the  nineteenth  ballot  stood:  Hawley  60;  Jewell  42; 
Platt  25;  Harrison  16;  S.  W.  Kellogg  5;  Barnum  2. 
So  it  went  on  for  eleven  more  ballots,  when,  for  the  first 
time,  Platt  forged  ahead  to  second  place:  Hawley  63; 
Platt  39;  Jewell  37;  Harrison  10.  The  thirty-third 
ballot  gave  Hawley  66;  Platt  61;  Jewell  18;  Harrison  7. 
On  the  thirty-fourth  ballot,  Platt  leaped  to  first  place, 
with  74  votes;  Hawley  72;  Jewell  3;  Harrison  2.  He 
gained  one  vote  from  Hawley  on  the  thirty-fifth  ballot, 
so  that  he  was  within  one  vote  of  the  nomination,  and 
on  the  thirty-sixth  ballot  the  longed  for  vote  came.1 
Just  where  it  came  from  has  ever  since  been  a  source 
of  friendly  dispute  among  the  politicians  of  the  State. 
There  are  living  to-day  at  least  a  dozen  men,  each  of 
whom  can  relate  with  circumstantial  detail  how  it 

i  The  full  record  of  the  balloting  in  the  midnight  caucus  follows: 


44 


Orville  H.  Platt 


happened — how  he  delivered  that  missing  vote.  It 
is  no  part  of  this  history  to  settle  the  dispute,  although 
one  incident  may  be  recorded.  That  Marcus  E. 
Baldwin  of  Woodbridge  was  one  of  those  who  cast  his 
vote  for  Platt  for  the  first  time  on  the  decisive  ballot, 
appears  from  the  proceedings  of  the  meeting  at  Meriden 
held  the  night  after  Mr.  Platt 's  election  by  the  Legisla 
ture,  when  Mr.  Baldwin  was  introduced  facetiously,  by 
Senator  Lines,  as  "  one  of  the  men  who,  when  he  came 


INFORMAL 

BALLOT 

Joseph  R.  Hawley, 
Marshall  Jewell, 

Hartford, 
Hartford, 

49 
35 

Orville  H.  Platt, 

Meriden, 

24 

Henry  B.  Harrison, 

New  Haven, 

14 

William  T.  Minor, 

Stamford, 

14 

P.  T.  Barnum, 

Bridgeport, 

10 

Charles  B.  Andrews, 

Litchfield, 

i 

Benjamin  Douglas, 

Middletown, 

i 

148 


FORMAL    BALLOTS 


Hawley  

ist 
ec 

2d 

CO 

3d 
62 

4th 
61 

5th 

61 

6th 
67 

Jewell 

•JQ 

4.-? 

4.-? 

46 

4O 

47 

Platt           .    ... 

2  S 

2O 

1  0 

22 

j  e 

I  3 

Harrison  

i  ? 

14 

18 

17 

2  S 

2  I 

Barnum 

I 

Minor  .  . 

7 

5 

4 

Hawley 

7th 

8th 
67 

9th 

7l 

ioth 

7  I 

nth 

64 

1  2th 

Jewell   

so 

46 

c  I 

r  7 

52 

Platt  

Q 

5 

c 

DO 
IO 

* 

16 

Harrison  .  . 

24 

28 

28 

27 

21 

16 

Hawley 

61 

1  4th 
64 

1  5th 

1  6th 

1  7th 

1  8th 

Jewell 

48 

46 

4  I 

DV 

59 
?  6 

5 

Platt 

23 

26 

2O 

2  e 

3° 
28 

33 

Harrison   

18 

14 

2O 

18 

18 

'V 

16 

Chas.  B.  Andrews. 
S.  W.  Kellogg... 
Barnum  
Minor  .  . 

I 

5 

2 
I 

3 
4 

i 

i 

4 
6 

The  Midnight  Caucus 


45 


to  Mr.  Platt,  never  left  him  until  he  was  elected."  Mr. 
Baldwin  had  been  a  Harrison  man  from  the  beginning, 
although  he  was  an  intimate  associate  of  many  of  Mr. 
Platt's  friends.  The  representatives  from  New  Haven 
County  were  in  the  habit  of  running  up  to  Hartford 
every  day  on  the  same  train,  and  there  was  much 
good-natured  chaffing  back  and  forth.  Baldwin  was 
especially  vehement  in  support  of  Harrison,  declaring 
that  he  should  vote  for  Harrison  "  first,  last,  and  all  the 


FORMAL  BALLOTS 

i  gth 

20th 

2ISt 

22d 

23d 

Hawley 

60 

60 

r  & 

61 

60 

Jewell 

42 
25 

45 
26 

47 
28 

47 
28 

46 
24 

Platt  

Harrison  

1  6 

14 

I  7 

14 

12 

Kellogg 

5" 

/ 

I 

T" 

Barnum 

2 

p 

Lyman  D. 

Brewster  

2 

W.  T.  Minor 

I 

, 

(II.45   P.M.) 


Hawley  

24th 
67 

25th 
65 

26th 
62 

27th 
62 

28th 
1:7 

Jewell  

47 

A7 

41 

41 

40 

Platt 

2  < 

2O 

•}  i 

?  i 

•7  -J 

Harrison  .  . 

ii 

12 

17 

16 

12 

Hawley 

agth 
61 

3oth 
63 

3ist 
64 

32d 
64 

33d 
66 

Jewell           

40 

•j  7 

•24 

26 

18 

Platt  

36 

3Q 

43 

CI 

61 

Harrison  .  . 

12 

Q 

0 

7 

Hawley 

34th 

72 

35th 

71 

3  6th 
72 

Jewell             

-2 

-2 

i 

Platt  

74 

7c 

76 

Harrison  .  . 

2 

2 

Two  ballots  were  declared  void,  as  more  votes  were_  cast  than 
there  were  present  in  the  caucus. 


46  Orville  H.  Platt 

time."  Finally  James  P.  Platt  said  to  him:  "I  'm  a 
pretty  good  Platt  man,  but  I  11  tell  you  what  I  '11  do. 
If  the  time  ever  comes  when  my  vote  will  nominate 
Harrison,  you  can  have  it.  But  you  must  agree  that  if 
the  time  ever  comes  when  your  vote  will  nominate  Platt, 
you  will  give  it."  "  Agreed,"  said  Baldwin,  and  neither 
thought  of  the  incident  again  till  just  before  the  deci 
sive  ballot.  James  Platt  had  noticed  the  two  persistent 
votes  for  Harrison,  and  it  flashed  across  his  mind  where 
one  of  them  came  from;  he  went  over  to  Baldwin,  and 
asked  him  if  he  remembered  the  conversation  on  the 
train  going  up  from  Meriden.  "  I  do,"  replied  Baldwin. 
"Well,"  said  young  Platt,  "this  is  the  time  and  this 
is  the  place."  Baldwin  cast  his  vote  for  Platt.  At 
2.30  A.M.,  the  result  of  the  thirty- sixth  formal  ballot 
was  announced:  Platt  76;  Hawley  72;  Jewell  i,  and 
Platt  was  nominated.  On  January  2ist,  the  election 
took  place  in  joint  assembly  of  the  Legislature.  It 
resulted:  Platt  139;  Barnum  94;  scattering  i;  not 
voting  10. 

The  nomination  when  it  came  was  a  surprise  to  the 
successful  candidate.  He  spent  the  eventful  night 
in  Meriden,  remaining  in  the  telegraph  office  until 
midnight,  and  during  the  early  evening  he  received  fre 
quent  despatches  from  Hartford.  When  his  vote  fell 
off  to  five,  he  gave  it  up  and  went  to  bed  and  to  sleep. 
After  the  caucus  adjourned,  the  Meriden  campaigners 
caught  the  first  train  for  home  and  drove  up  from  the 
station  to  the  house  in  the  early  morning.  They  all 
ran  upstairs,  where  they  found  Platt  asleep.  They 
woke  him  up,  John  Coe  shouting,  "Get  up  there,  you 
old  United  States  Senator!"  but  they  could  not  get 
Platt  to  believe  it  until  he  had  heard  the  whole  story 
of  the  caucus  to  the  end. 

It  would  be  agreeable  to  set  down  here  that  the  action 


The  Midnight  Caucus  47 

of  the  midnight  caucus  was  received  with  approbation 
everywhere.  The  truth  is,  however,  that  for  a  time 
there  was  a  feeling  of  disappointment,  which  found 
expression,  thinly  veiled,  in  many  of  the  newspapers 
within  the  State  and  openly  in  most  of  those  without. 
Popular  fancy  seems  to  have  fixed  itself  upon  General 
Hawley,  which  was  not  at  all  to  be  wondered  at,  and 
failing  him,  there  were  several  names  which  would  have 
appealed  to  it  before  the  one  which  for  the  first  time 
now  challenged  its  attention.  General  Hawley  came 
forward  handsomely  in  the  shadow  of  personal  dis 
appointment,  in  a  short  editorial  paragraph  which 
appeared  in  the  Hartford  Courant  of  the  following  morn 
ing,  and  which  must  have  been  written  within  the  hour 
of  the  announcement  of  his  defeat.  It  is  possible  that 
what  he  wrote  served  as  an  introduction  of  Mr.  Platt 
to  many  of  the  people  of  Connecticut,  as  it  did  to  all 
beyond  the  borders  of  the  State.  General  Hawley 
could  not  refrain  from  alluding  gently  to  ' '  the  influences 
that  caused  the  various  changes  in  the  balloting,"  but 
he  added: 

Mr.  Platt  is  fifty-one  years  old,  a  native  of  Washington, 
Litchfield  County,  an  able  lawyer,  at  present  Attorney  for 
the  State  in  New  Haven  County.  His  first  prominent 
appearance  in  public  life  was  as  Secretary  of  State  in  1857-8, 
during  Governor  Holley's  administration.  In  1861-2  he 
was  a  Senator  from  the  sixth  district;  in  1864  and  1869  he 
was  in  the  House,  the  latter  year  being  elected  Speaker. 

He  is  a  gentleman  of  most  honorable  character,  sound 
judgment,  well-balanced  mind,  familiarity  with  political 
affairs,  and  much  sagacity  in  conducting  them.  He  is 
sound  in  principle,  an  Anti-Slavery  man  and  Republican 
from  his  boyhood,  a  good  hard-money  man  and  sure  to  have 
convictions  and  follow  them.  This  much  his  chief  competi- 


48  Orville  H.  Platt 

tor  takes  pleasure  in  writing  hastily  at  the  late  hour  which 
announces  his  nomination. 

Other  newspapers  printed  slighting  comments  which 
their  authors  lived  to  regret,  and  there  were  fugitive 
suggestions  in  Democratic  journals  that  the  Democrats 
in  the  Legislature  should  combine  with  a  minority  of 
Republicans  to  elect  Hawley,  who  of  course  would  not 
have  tolerated  such  a  thing.  Two  years  later,  in  1881, 
he  was  unanimously  nominated  by  the  Republican 
caucus,  was  elected  Senator,  and  served  by  Platt's  side 
for  nearly  twenty-five  years. 

Among  Mr.  Platt's  neighbors,  and  among  those  who 
knew  him,  the  feeling  toward  him  was  cordial  and 
appreciative.  The  New  Haven  Union  said: 

O.  H.  Platt  holds  high  rank  in  the  estimation  of  the 
people  of  Meriden,  among  whom  he  has  lived  and  worked 
these  twenty-seven  years,  and  bears  a  public  and  private 
character  beyond  reproach.  He  is  a  deacon  in  the  First 
Congregational  Church  with  which  he  has  been  connected 
since  the  Reverend  W.  H.  H.  Murray1  preached  there,  and 
he  is  forward  in  all  Christian  work  in  his  adopted  town.  A 
man  of  few  words,  of  fewer  promises,  and  stern  unyielding 
will,  he  rarely  fails  a  friend  in  need  or  turns  back  from  the 
path  he  has  marked  out  for  himself.  He  is  pre-eminently 
noted  for  two  things:  unselfishness,  in  political  as  well  as 
social  life,  and  true  earnestness.  As  a  friend  remarked: 
11  He  has  not  a  selfish  bone  in  his  body.  The  best  years  of 
his  life  he  has  devoted  to  others,  and  that  is  one  reason  he 
is  to-day  a  poor  man.  " 

The  friends  and  neighbors  in  Meriden  deferred  their 
greeting  until  after  the  formal  action  of  the  Legis- 

1  Mr.  Murray  did  not  preach  in  Meriden  until  1864,  some  years 
after  Mr.  Platt  became  a  member  of  the  Church.  He  had  earlier 
preached  in  the  Church  at  Judea  for  a  little  while. 


The  Midnight  Caucus  49 

lature  had  set  the  seal  of  certainty  upon  the  choice 
of  the  caucus.  On  the  night  following  the  election, 
there  was  a  reception  at  the  Meriden  house,  with  illumi 
nations  and  a  midnight  supper.  There  had  been  no 
formal  preparations,  but  the  crowds  were  dense,  and 
for  two  hours  men  of  every  calling  assured  the  newly 
elected  Senator  of  their  good- will.  In  the  midst  of  the 
reception  "  Neighbor  Platt"  was  led  to  the  platform 
where  he  spoke  a  few  characteristically  simple  words: 

I  thank  you,  my  friends,  for  this  kind  reception. 
This  is  neither  the  time  nor  the  place  to  make  a  speech, 
and  yet  I  think  I  would  be  lacking  in  the  common  feeling 
of  humanity  if  I  did  not  express  to  you  in  some  way  the 
thanks  I  feel  for  the  respect  you  have  ever  shown  me.  It 
touches  me,  coming  as  it  does  from  you  men  who  have 
known  me  longest  and  best — the  men  I  have  lived  with 
these  twenty-eight  years.  I  have  lived  a  somewhat  trans 
parent  life.  You  know  what  I  have  done  and  what  I  have 
failed  to  do.  It  is  that  that  makes  this  demonstration  the 
more  acceptable  and  touching  to  me.  I  think  no  man  could 
have  lived  in  a  place  so  long  and  been  more  sensible  of  the 
kindly  feeling  entertained  toward  him  than  I.  I  want  to 
thank  all  my  friends,  but  especially  my  Meriden  friends. 
They  were  not  politicians,  but  were  full  of  love  and  devotion, 
and  labored  for  my  welfare  without  hope  of  reward;  and 
such  kindly  feeling  and  disposition  touches  me  to  the  heart. 
Their  faith  makes  me  rejoice  more  at  their  gratification 
than  my  success.  As  I  meet  you  here  and  have  met  you 
elsewhere,  so  shall  I  be  pleased  to  meet  you  at  all  times.  I 
shall  be  glad  to  meet  you  at  any  time  or  place — glad  to  meet 
the  kind  friends  whose  memory  I  shall  always  cherish. 
Just  now  everything  is  new  and  seems  unreal.  I  can 
scarcely  appreciate  the  future.  How  I  shall  bear  myself, 
how  I  shall  walk  in  the  new  path  in  which  I  am  set,  time 
will  show.  I  do  know  that  I  shall  try  to  do  right  as  I  see 
the  right  and  I  have  faith  to  believe  that  this  will  bring  me 


50  Orville  H.  Platt 

through  to  the  end  without  discredit  to  you,  to  myself,  or 
to  the  State.  My  friends,  this  is  no  place  for  an  announce 
ment  of  my  political  views.  I  have  in  the  course  of  my 
life  dealt  and  received  many  hard  political  blows,  but  I 
have  always  tried  to  act  right  and  shall  so  continue.  I 
thank  you  again  for  your  kindness,  and  I  trust  that  all 
your  expectations  with  reference  to  me  will  not  be  dis 
appointed.  Good -night.1 

i  At  the  supper  which  followed  the  reception,  there  were  many 
complimentary  speeches  from  members  of  the  General  Assembly 
and  friends.  A  dispatch  was  read  from  Mr.  Platt's  old  teacher, 
F.  W.  Gunn,  as  follows: 

"WASHINGTON,   CONNECTICUT, 

January  22d. 
"To  MAYOR  LINES: 

"Washington,  the  place  of  his  birth  and  growth  to  manhood, 
joins  with  Meriden,  the  home  of  his  mature  life  and  active  labor, 
in  congratulations  upon  the  election  of  Honorable  O.  H.  Platt  as 
a  Senator  of  the  United  States — 'An  honest  man  's  the  noblest 
work  of  God.'" 

After  this,  Mr.  Platt  was  called  to  his  feet  again.  The  rest  of 
the  proceedings  may  be  described  in  the  words  of  the  Meriden 
Daily  Republican  the  following  day: 

"Mr.  Platt  rose  and  made  one  of  those  earnest,  thoughtful, 
ringing  speeches  that  took  his  own  townsmen,  who  heard  him,  back 
to  the  grand  speeches  he  made  in  Town  Hall  in  the  presidential 
and  other  campaigns,  when  the  services  of  our  best  and  most 
powerful  men  were  required  on  the  political  platform.  He  began 
by  referring  to  the  senatorial  contest  just  closed,  and  how  deeply 
he  felt  the  responsibilities  of  the  new  duties  to  which  he  was  called. 
In  endeavoring  to  discharge  them,  he  would  be  guided  solely  by 
what  he  had  always  considered  a  safe  rule  to  follow,  and  had  made 
the  rule  of  his  life — doing  what  he  believed  to  be  right.  To  say 
that  he  was  gratified  at  being  surrounded  by  so  many  of  his  imme 
diate  neighbors  and  good  personal  friends  did  not  express  how  he 
felt,  and  if  any  one  thing  more  than  another  gave  him  special 
gratification,  it  was  to  know  that  his  old  friends  of  years  ago,  in 
the  home  of  his  boyhood,  Litchfield  County,  were  rejoicing  at  his 
election.  Another  source  of  gratification  to  him  was  that  his  four 
competitors  were  gentlemen  whom  he  was  proud  to  call  his  friends, 
and  he  knew  of  no  four  gentlemen  whom  he  would  more  freely  call 
on  for  a  personal  favor,  than  on  Joe  Hawley,  H.  B.  Harrison, 


The  Midnight  Caucus  51 

Marshall  Jewell,  and  Governor  Minor.  And  he  was  glad  to  observe 
that  Connecticut  had  such  noble  men  to  select  a  Senator  from,  for 
had  either  been  elected,  the  State  would  have  been  honored,  and 
the  principles  of  the  Republican  party  faithfully  vindicated. 
Mr.  Platt  then  went  on  to  say  that  he  rejoiced  that  no  friend  of 
his,  in  the  most  heated  hour  of  the  campaign,  had  dropped  an  unkind 
or  offensive  word  toward  any  of  these  gentlemen.  Had  they  done 
so,  it  would  have  been  painful  to  him.  He  felt  that  had  either  been 
elected  instead  of  himself,  they  might  have  brought  more  ability 
to  the  discharge  of  the  duties  of  the  position,  but  none  of  them 
could  exhibit  a  greater  desire  to  do  right.  It  was  the  desire  to  do 
right  that  signalized  the  victory  and  achievements  of  the  Re 
publican  party,  and,  knowing  of  that  desire,  he  was  proud  to  have 
been  identified  with  that  party  of  progress  since  its  birth.  It  was 
the  determination  to  do  right  that  lifted  politics  from  the  mire, 
and  nerved  conscientious  men  to  become  politicians. 

"Mr.  Platt  then  reviewed  the  Republican  party  and  the  previous 
parties  of  which  it  is  an  outgrowth,  covering  a  period  of  thirty 
years,  every  year  of  which  was  devoted  by  the  Republican  party 
and  its  predecessors  with  similar  principles  to  contending  for  the 
rights  of  man.  He  liked  the  Republican  party  because  it  made 
these  rights  of  man  its  cardinal  principle,  and  because  it  did  so, 
he  was  a  Republican,  and  he  could  sincerely  say  that  in  all  his  active 
participation  in  Republican  campaigns,  he  never  thought  of  self, 
never  sought  nor  cared  for  political  place,  his  ambition  being  to  lift 
the  Republican  party  to  a  plane  where  the  rights  and  equality  of 
man  would  be  recognized  all  over  the  land,  and  that  a  free  ballot 
would  be  cast,  whether  in  South  Carolina  or  Connecticut.  'This 
must  be  and  shall  be  accomplished,'  said  Mr.  Platt.  'With  that 
principle  to  contend  for,  the  party  contending  for  it  cannot  fail. ' 
Mr.  Platt  then  deprecated  in  strong  words  the  use  of  money  in 
elections.  It  provoked  him,  he  said,  when  he  heard  it  said  that 
campaigns  could  not  be  carried  on  without  a  lavish  or  corrupt 
expenditure  of  money.  The  falsity  of  the  assertion  has  been 
demonstrated,  and  he  was  thankful  that  it  had  been  demonstrated 
by  the  Republican  party.  Mr.  Platt,  after  dwelling  on  this  point 
at  some  length,  referred  to  the  currency  question,  remarking  that 
like  all  other  issues  of  the  day  it  had  only  two  sides,  right  and  wrong, 
and  he  firmly  believed  that  the  man  who  was  right  was  he  who 
advocated  a  currency  that  would  have  a  standard  value  all  over 
the  world,  without  being  subjected  to  daily  fluctuations.  He  stood 
there,  and  he  believed  the  great  mass  of  the  Republican  party 
stood  there.  Mr.  Platt  closed  by  recognizing  the  distinguished 
honor  and  privilege  of  representing  Connecticut  in  the  councils 


52  Orville  H.  Platt 

of  the  nation.  He  loved  Connecticut  because  it  was  his  native 
State  and  he  had  grown  with  its  growth.  He  had  proudly  watched 
its  progress,  not  only  in  the  pursuits  of  the  sturdy  farmer,  but  in 
its  manufacturing  interests,  which  had  increased  little  by  little,  un 
til  every  railroad  and  stream  was  dotted  with  a  manufactory,  a  trib 
ute  to  the  thrift  of  the  commonwealth — a  commonwealth  that  had  in 
it  many  of  the  sons  and  daughters  of  the  passengers  of  the  Mayflower, 
whose  puritanical  blood  was  a  certain  protection  against  all  vague 
'isms'  and  socialistic  and  communistic  ideas  and  heresies  that  were 
seeking  a  place  in  New  England.  In  Connecticut  they  would  make 
no  headway.  Mr.  Platt  resumed  his  seat  amid  a  storm  of  applause. 

"At  the  close  of  Mr.  Platt 's  remarks,  Mr.  Worthington  took  the 
floor  voluntarily  and  said  the  election  of  Mr.  Platt  was  a  cause  for 
more  than  usual  gratification,  because  it  was  accomplished  without 
expenditure  of  a  cent  for  liquor  of  any  kind,  or  for  any  other  corrupt 
purpose.  It  proved  that  Mr.  Platt  was  true  to  the  principle  of 
total  abstinence,  and  he  would  therefore  propose,  in  cold  water, 
the  health  of  Honorable  Orville  H.  Platt.  The  whole  company 
rose,  and  with  glasses  raised,  duly  responded,  after  which  the  com 
pany  separated." 

The  following  day  the  new  Senator  went  to  Hartford  to  meet  the 
members  of  the  Legislature.  The  Meriden  Republican  gave  a 
naively  interesting  picture  of  the  event: 

"For  the  first  time  since  its  completion,  Senator  Platt  was  in 
the  State  Capitol  to-day.  He  went  up  from  here  on  the  nine  o'clock 
train  and  took  his  accustomed  seat  in  the  smoking-car.  It  soon 
became  generally  known  on  the  train  that  the  new  Senator  was  on 
board.  Many  came  from  other  cars  and  carelessly  passed  by  to 
get  a  good,  square  look  at  the  man  of  whom  they  had  heard  so 
much  the  past  few  days. 

"Arriving  at  Hartford,  Senator  Platt  strolled  leisurely  over  the 
Capitol,  accompanied  by  Senator  Lines  and  Representative  Platt, 
son  of  the  Senator.  At  the  Capitol  the  Senator  was  conducted  to 
the  governor's  room,  where  Governor  Andrews  gave  him  a  cordial 
greeting.  The  new  Capitol  was  then  looked  over,  and  Senator 
Platt  commented  on  the  beauty  of  the  work  and  paid  many  compli 
ments  to  the  fidelity  of  the  Capitol  Commissioners.  Soon  after  the 
House  convened,  the  news  was  circulated  that  Senator  Platt  was 
in  the  building  and  a  general  desire  to  see  him  was  expressed. 
Speaker  Wright  sent  a  friend  of  Senator  Platt  to  him  to  know  if  he 
would  not  present  himself  in  the  House,  if  sent  for,  after  official 
recognition  of  his  presence  in  the  Capitol  was  announced.  Senator 
Platt  sent  back  word  that  he  preferred  to  have  no  formality,  but 
that  he  would  drop  into  the  House  just  before  adjournment  and 


The  Midnight  Caucus  53 


see  how  many  faces  he  knew  there  and  how  many  knew  him.  On 
Speaker  Wright  being  informed  of  Mr.  Platt's  wishes,  Mr.  P.  T. 
Barnum,  who  was  conversing  with  the  Speaker  at  the  time,  said 
that  would  never  do. 

"  'The  new  Senator  must  show  himself  and  give  us  all  a  good 
look  at  the  man  we  voted  for. '  A  few  minutes  later,  as  the  House 
was  about  to  adjourn,  Senator  Platt  entered,  accompanied  by  his 
son,  and  both  sat  at  the  latter' s  desk,  and  Speaker  Wright  at  once 
went  to  Mr.  Platt.  Then  P.  T.  Barnum  arose  from  his  desk  and 
said:  'Mr.  Speaker:  This  House  has  always  been  running  me  and 
remarking  upon  their  desire  to  see  my  show.  But  I  think  we  have 
with  us  what  will  please  them  more  than  anything  I  could  present. 
I  understand  our  distinguished  Senator-elect,  Orville  H.  Platt,  is 
in  this  House,  and  I  move  you,  sir,'that  he  be  invited  to  the  Speaker's 
desk,  that  we  all  have  the  pleasure  of  looking  on  his  genial  face. ' 
Speaker  Wright  conducted  Senator  Platt  to  the  desk  and  declared 
a  recess  of  five  minutes.  Senator  Platt,  on  rising,  was  received  with 
deafening  applause,  again  and  again  repeated.  He  said: 

"  'You  can  scarcely  expect  me  to  say  hardly  more  than  to  tender 
to  you  my  acknowledgment  for  what  you  have  done  in  selecting 
me  to  represent  the  State  of  Connecticut,  in  the  Senate  of  the  United 
States.  Others  might  have  been  chosen  who  would  represent  you 
more  ably,  but  no  man,  I  am  sure,  can  bring  to  the  service  a  more 
ardent  love  for  the  State  than  I.  I  think  I  know  something  of  the 
people  of  this  State,  of  its  industries  and  wants,  and  certainly  I 
shall  try  to  faithfully  represent  its  people,  its  industries,  and  its 
wants.  I  have  seen  its  manufacturing  interests  grow  from  the  small 
est  beginnings,  until  now  manufacturing  interests  dot  every  railroad 
and  stream  in  the  State.  I  have  seen  its  wealth  trebled,  and  its 
population  vastly  increase.  I  think  I  know  something  of  its 
people,  and  as  much  as  I  admire  the  people  of  other  States  I  do 
think  that  there  is  more  of  the  loyal  spirit  and  character  which 
distinguished  those  who  came  over  on  the  Mayflower  than  can  be 
found  in  any  other  State,  in  its  institutions  and  its  people ;  and 
God  helping  me,  I  never  shall  be  recreant  to  the  trust  you  have 
committed  to  me.' 

"Senator  Platt  was  loudly  applauded  at  the  close  and  soon  left 
the  House.  He  visited  the  Senate  Chamber  and  engaged  in  social 
conversation  with  the  Senators  who  invited  him  to  their  private 
room  off  the  Senate,  where  a  pleasant  hour  was  spent.  The  Senator 
during  the  afternoon  called  on  several  personal  friends  in  Hartford, 
each  of  whom  most  cordially  congratulated  him  and  declared 
themselves  not  only  satisfied,  but  well  pleased  with  his  election. 
The  visit  was  a  very  pleasant  one  to  the  Senator-elect.  " 


CHAPTER  V 

A  LOOKER-ON  IN  THE  SENATE 

First  Experiences   at    Washington — The   Forty-Sixth    Congress — 
Eulogy  of  Rush  Clark. 

THE  newly  created  Senator  was  given  little  time  to 
prepare  himself  for  the  opportunity  thrust  into 
his  hand.  His  election  had  taken  place  in  the  closing 
days  of  the  last  session  of  the  Forty-fifth  Congress,  when 
the  situation  growing  out  of  differences  between  Presi 
dent  Hayes  and  the  Democratic  leaders  at  the  capital 
resulted  in  a  filibuster  which  prevented  the  passage  of 
two  great  supply  bills,  the  Army  Appropriation  bill  and 
the  Legislative,  Executive,  and  Judicial.  President 
Hayes,  accordingly,  was  compelled  on  the  4th  of 
March  to  issue  a  call  ior  a  special  session  of  the  Forty- 
sixth  Congress,  to  meet  on  March  18,  1879.  Mr. 
Platt  was  hurried  into  his  new  duties  at  Washington. 
He  bade  good-bye  to  the  old  scenes  at  Meriden  with  a 
feeling  of  regret,  looking  toward  the  future  without 
elation,  yet  without  self -distrust.  His  old  friend  John 
Coe  drove  him  to  the  station  the  day  he  left  Meriden  to 
go  to  Washington.  Little  was  said  by  either  until 
just  as  they  were  about  to  part,  when  Mr.  Platt 
remarked  slowly: 

"John,    I  'm  going  to  the   United   States   Senate; 
you  won't  hear  much  of  a  fellow  named  Platt  for  some 

54 


A  Looker-on  in  the  Senate  55 

years.  I  'm  going  to  listen  and  learn,  and  I  won't 
begin  to  talk  until  I  stand  for  something." 

Mr.  Platt  took  his  seat  on  the  first  day  of  the  session. 
Among  those  who  appeared  at  the  presiding  officer's 
desk  with  him  to  take  the  oath  of  office  were  William 
B.  Allison  of  Iowa,  Matt.  H.  Carpenter  of  Wisconsin, 
Roscoe  Conkling  of  New  York,  John  J.  Ingalls  of 
Kansas,  John  A.  Logan  of  Illinois,  Justin  S.  Morrill  of 
Vermont,  George  H.  Pendleton  of  Ohio,  Daniel  W. 
Voorhees  of  Indiana,  John  P.  Jones  of  Nevada,  Wade 
Hampton  of  South  Carolina,  Zebulon  B.  Vance  of  North 
Carolina,  and  George  G.  Vest  of  Missouri.  Of  these, 
all  except  Vance,  Pendleton,  Hampton,  and  Vest  had 
seen  previous  service.  Other  members  of  the  Senate 
with  whom  Mr.  Platt  found  himself  associated  were 
John  T.  Morgan  of  Alabama,  A.  H.  Garland  of  Arkansas, 
Newton  Booth  of  California,  Henry  M.  Teller  of  Colo 
rado,  Thomas  F.  Bayard  and  Eli  Saulsbury  of  Dela 
ware,  Benjamin  H.  Hill  of  Georgia,  David  Davis  of 
Illinois,  Joseph  E.  McDonald  of  Indiana,  Samuel  J. 
Kirkwood  of  Iowa,  Preston  B.  Plumb  of  Kansas, 
James  B.  Beck  of  Kentucky,  William  Pitt  Kellogg  of 
Louisiana,  James  G.  Blaine  and  Hannibal  Hamlin 
of  Maine,  Henry  L.  Dawes  and  George  F.  Hoar  of 
Massachusetts,  Zachariah  Chandler  and  Thomas  W. 
Ferry  of  Michigan,  William  Windom  of  Minnesota, 
Blanche  K.  Bruce  and  L.  Q.  C.  Lamar  of  Mississippi, 
Francis  M.  Cockrell  of  Missouri,  Allen  G.  Thurman  of 
Ohio,  Henry  B.  Anthony  and  Ambrose  E.  Burnside  of 
Rhode  Island.  With  some  of  these  men,  Allison, 
Morrill,  Vest,  Teller,  Hoar,  and  Cockrell,  he  had 
associations  almost  throughout  his  political  career. 

With  the  scrupulous  regard  for  seniority  and  prece 
dent  which  characterizes  the  procedure  of  the  Senate,  he 


56  Orville  H.  Platt 

was  placed  at  the  tail-end  of  three  committees — none 
of  the  first  importance — Pensions,  Patents,  and  the 
Select  Committee  to  investigate  and  report  the  best 
means  of  preventing  the  introduction  and  spread  of 
epidemic  diseases.  All  committees  were  in  control 
of  the  Democratic  majority,  so  that  there  was  little 
which  the  least  important  member  of  the  minority 
could  be  expected  to  accomplish.1 

It  is  not  to  be  wondered  at  that  little  was  heard  from 
the  country  lawyer,  unexpectedly  elevated  to  the  United 
States  Senate,  taking  his  seat  within  two  months  of  his 
election.  In  this  first  session,  lasting  from  March  i8th, 
to  July  ist,  and  monopolized  by  a  bitter  partisan  dis 
cussion  of  the  use  of  Federal  troops  at  the  polls,  it  is 
recorded  that  he  introduced  two  bills  for  the  relief  of 
constituents  and  that  he  spoke  six  times.  His  entire 
activities  during  the  session  are  covered  in  thirty-four 
lines  of  the  Congressional  Record.  His  first  forensic 
appearance  in  the  Senate  occurred  in  the  course  of  a 

i  The  composition  of  these  committees  was  as  follows: 

PENSIONS:  Withers  (chairman),  McPherson,  Groome,  Call, 
Farley,  Ingalls,  Bruce,  Kellogg,  Platt. 

PATENTS:  Kernan  (chairman),  Coke,  Slater,  Call,  Booth,  Hoar, 
Platt. 

EPIDEMIC  DISEASES:  Harris  (chairman),  Lamar,  Garland,  Jonas, 
Paddock,  Sharon,  Platt. 

Late  in  the  session  Mr.  Hoar  withdrew  from  the  Select  Committee 
to  inquire  into  alleged  frauds  in  the  late  elections,  of  which  he 
was  the  last  member,  and  Mr.  Platt  took  his  place.  His  seniors 
on  this  committee  were  Wallace  (chairman),  Bailey,  Garland, 
McDonald,  Kernan,  Teller,  Cameron  of  Wisconsin,  and  Kirkwood. 

At  a  late  stage  of  the  session  a  committee  was  appointed  to  con 
sider  a  bill  introduced  by  Senator  Pendleton  to  provide  that  the 
principal  officers  of  each  of  the  executive  departments  might 
occupy  seats  on  the  floor  of  the  Senate  and  House  of  Represen 
tatives,  and  Mr.  Platt  was  placed  at  the  end  of  this  committee, 
which  had  the  following  membership :  Pendleton,  Voorhees,  Bayard, 
Butler,  Farley,  Conkling,  Allison,  Elaine,  Ingalls,  Platt. 


A  Looker-on  in  the  Senate  57 

speech  by  his  colleague,  Mr.  Eaton,  on  the  Legislative, 
Executive,  and  Judicial  Appropriation  bill.  It  is  given 
as  a  matter  of  history : 

MR.  EATON:  I  want  to  say  here,  and  my  colleague  will 
agree  with  me,  that  in  nearly  every  town  in  Connecticut 
no  matter  which  party  is  in  power,  not  in  all  towns,  but 
in  most,  a  fair  share  of  the  jurors  is  given  to  the  weaker 
party.  It  is  so  in  my  own  town  always.  So  it  is  with 
justices  of  the  peace. 

MR.  PLATT:  Will  my  colleague  permit  me  to  interrupt 
him? 

MR.  EATON:  Certainly. 

MR.  PLATT:  That  ought  to  be  the  case,  but  there  are  far 
too  many  towns  in  the  State  where  it  is  not  the  case. 

MR.  EATON:  I  know  it  is  the  case  to  a  certain  extent. 

Not  a  sensational  or  dramatic  entrance  upon  a  public 
career !  The  assurance  given  John  Coe  on  the  drive  to 
the  station  at  Meriden  was  in  a  fair  way  to  verification. 

During  his  second  session  he  was  not  much  more 
active.  He  is  credited  with  making  "remarks"  on 
thirty  different  occasions.  Most  of  them  were  casual 
and  related  either  to  the  business  of  the  Committees 
on  Pensions  and  Patents  of  which  he  was  a  member,  or 
the  needs  of  some  constituent.  Whenever  he  inter 
jected  an  inquiry  or  a  comment  it  was  in  the  direction 
of  economy  and  regular  procedure.  But  he  took 
advantage  of  an  opportunity  to  declare  himself  briefly 
on  at  least  one  important  question  of  public  policy. 
Shortly  after  the  Christmas  recess  he  introduced  the 
following  joint  resolution,  which  was  ordered  to  lie  on 
the  table : 

"  Whereas,  An  improved  and  cheaper  maritime  communi 
cation  between  the  Atlantic  and  Pacific  seaboards  of  the 
United  States  by  means  of  a  ship-canal  through  some 


58  Orville  H.  Platt 

portion  of  the  Central  American  isthmus  has  become  im 
portant  to  the  commercial  interests  of  this  country ;  and 

Whereas,  Congress  deems  it  to  be  necessary  and  ex 
pedient  that  the  national  and  public  interests  in  such  a 
communication  should  be  secured,  rather  than  merely 
private  and  speculative  ends:  Therefore, 

Resolved  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives,  etc., 
That  the  President  be  requested,  if  he  shall  deem  it  expe 
dient,  to  communicate  to  the  governments  of  the  principal 
maritime  nations  of  Europe  the  desire  of  this  Government 
to  secure  such  public  interests,  and  to  invite  the  co-operation 
of  such  governments  in  the  selection  of  a  route  of  isthmus 
ship-transit,  which  shall  be  found  to  subserve  most  largely 
the  general  interests  of  all  the  maritime  nations,  and  also  to 
communicate  to  such  governments  the  desire  of  the  Govern 
ment  to  come  to  a  mutual  understanding  with  reference 
to  the  neutrality  of  such  an  interoceanic  transit  when  it 
shall  have  been  opened  by  the  enterprise  and  capital  of 
their  respective  citizens. 

This  resolution  he  succeeded  in  getting  referred  to 
the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations  two  months  later, 
but  that  was  as  far  as  it  went.  He  lived  to  take  part 
in  all  the  legislation  which  resulted  ultimately  in  the 
digging  of  the  Isthmian  Canal. 

During  this  session  also,  Mr.  Platt  performed  for  the 
first  time  a  duty  which  he  was  called  upon  many  times 
to  repeat  during  his  twenty-six  years  of  service — a  deli 
cate  and  difficult  duty  in  which  he  always  showed 
rare  taste  and  feeling.  On  the  death  of  Rush  Clark,  a 
Representative  from  Iowa,  in  the  preceding  spring,  he 
had  been  appointed  a  member  of  the  committee  to 
accompany  the  body  to  the  grave,  and  he  was  asked 
to  take  part  in  the  memorial  exercises  in  the  Senate 
early  in  February.  What  he  said  should  be  recorded 
here,  not  only  for  its  excellence,  but  because  it  afforded 


A  Looker-on  in  the  Senate  59 

Mr.  Platt  his  first  opportunity  to  address  the  Senate 
in  any  but  the  briefest  possible  way : 

The  grave  has  at  least  one  feature  which  somewhat 
modifies  its  gloom.  There  a  man  is  truly  judged  by  his 
fellows.  The  sharp  antagonisms,  the  unjust  judgments  of 
life  are  buried  there,  before  the  coffin  is  lowered,  and  the 
abilities,  the  impress,  and  the  true  character  of  the  one  who 
is  to  be  its  occupant  are  there  justly  acknowledged. 

The  courtesies  of  the  grave  are  accorded  to  all,  but  men 
do  not  there  deceive  themselves  or  others  in  the  estimate 
which  they  place  upon  the  life  of  a  fallen  comrade.  There 
you  may  learn  his  true  history,  his  innermost  life,  his  true 
character.  At  the  home  of  Rush  Clark,  from  the  moment 
we  reached  the  station  till  the  last  sad  rites  had  been 
tenderly  and  lovingly  performed,  the  evidences  of  a  great 
sorrow  pervading  the  entire  community  were  unmistak 
able.  At  the  very  borders  of  the  State  which  he  had 
adopted  as  his  own,  we  were  made  to  feel  that  his  influence 
had  extended  beyond  the  limits  of  the  district  which  he 
more  immediately  represented,  and  that  the  whole  State 
mourned  for  one  of  its  truest  and  noblest  men.  All  along 
the  route  to  the  beautiful  city  which  had  been  the  scene 
of  his  more  active  labors,  we  were  met  by  strong,  true  men, 
who  grieved  as  if  the  deceased  had  been  a  brother.  I  shall 
never  forget  the  hour  of  our  arrival  at  Iowa  City.  It  was 
night,  but  the  whole  population  had  gathered  to  pay  its 
tribute  of  respect  to  the  dead,  to  testify  its  sympathy  for 
the  bereaved.  The  saddened  faces  of  the  people,  seen  in 
the  light  of  the  torches  which  were  to  guide  us;  the  whis 
pered  orders  for  the  disposition  of  his  remains;  the  tears 
which  fell  from  the  eyes  of  sturdy  men,  all  spoke  most 
emphatically  of  the  character  of  the  man  and  of  the  place 
he  had  won  for  himself  in  the  hearts  of  all.  If  deep  sorrow 
could  have  restored  him  to  life  he  would  have  lived  again. 
It  was  an  hour  to  be  remembered  always,  and  its  impressions 
were  intensified  by  the  obsequies  ot  the  next  day,  when  a 


60  Orville  H.  Platt 

vast  concourse  gathered  to  attend  with  uncovered  heads 
the  impressive  funeral  ceremonies,  and  to  follow  in  long 
procession  to  the  tomb  all  that  was  left  of  him  who  had 
been  their  reliance  and  pride.  Neither  the  falling  rain 
nor  the  sharp  thunder  could  deter  those  who  honored  him 
from  the  performance  in  minutest  detail  of  the  last  solemn 
rites.  So  he  was  laid  away  to  rest  in  the  beautiful  cemetery 
just  outside  of  and  overlooking  the  city  he  had  chosen  for 
his  home.  How  appropriately  such  a  resting  place  is  called 
"God's  acre."  There  we  buried  him,  in  the  early  spring 
time,  when  the  opening  bud,  the  sprouting  grain,  and  the 
springing  grass  were  nature's  assurances  of  the  life  to 
come. 


CHAPTER  VI 

DEVELOPMENT  OF  A  LAWMAKER 
Growth  in  the  Senate — Personal  Characteristics 

TO  those  who  look  back  now  upon  his  service  in  the 
Senate  it  is  plain  that  the  traits  which  later  gave 
him  his  peculiar  hold  were  his  in  the  beginning.  From 
first  to  last  there  was  a  steady,  even  growth  in  qualities 
which  make  a  well-poised  legislator,  and  the  germs 
were  there  at  the  outset  in  his  patient  industry,  sound 
judgment,  and  rectitude.  He  liked  to  go  slow  and 
be  sure;  he  was  honest  in  his  speech  and  in  his  mental 
processes;  it  has  been  said  of  him  that  he  thought  on 
oath.  His  early  years  in  the  Senate  were  marked  by 
faithful  attention  to  the  duties  of  his  place,  by  quiet 
observation  of  what  was  going  on,  by  contented  accept 
ance  of  responsibilities  which  gradually  lengthening 
service  brought  upon  him.  Little  known  at  the  time 
of  his  election,  he  felt  bound  to  justify  it  by  being  as 
good  a  Senator  as  he  could.  So  he  worked  ploddingly 
on  the  committees  of  which  he  was  a  member  until 
he  mastered  the  business  of  each  and  investigated  with 
scrupulous  minuteness  every  question  that  came  up  to 
him.  He  could  not  rest  contented  with  a  thing  half 
done,  and  his  satisfaction  came  in  the  performance 
rather  than  in  the  resulting  praise.  "  I  have  no  am 
bitions,"  he  wrote  once;  "  what  I  do,  I  do  because  it  is 
set  me  to  do,  and  I  have  a  feeling  that  I  ought  to  do 

61 


62  Orville  H.  Platt 

it  as  thoroughly  and  as  well  as  I  can.  That  is  about 
all  of  it " ;  and  again:  " There  is  a  scriptural  text  some 
where  in  which  Christ  says  of  a  woman,  'She  hath  done 
what  she  could.'  I  have  never  had  any  other  motive." 
In  pronouncing  a  eulogy  on  Senator  Gear  of  Iowa,  he 
unconsciously  came  very  near  describing  himself: 

All  types  of  our  people  find  their  representatives  here, 
and  it  is  well  that  it  is  so.  Men  of  commanding  intellect, 
genius,  eloquence,  and  brilliancy  are  both  needed  and 
found  in  these  senatorial  seats,  but  other  men  equally 
representing  the  people  and  equally  useful,  who  do  not 
attract  popular  enthusiasm  by  reason  of  any  unusual  or 
striking  gifts,  are  quite  as  much  needed  here — men  of 
strong  good  sense,  men  of  affairs,  of  great  industry,  and 
unswerving  devotion  to  the  principles  and  the  interests  of 
the  Republic ;  men  whose  general  characteristics  can  best 
be  described  by  three  grand  words — sturdy,  faithful,  and 
true.  Senator  Gear  was  such  a  man.  Sometimes  I  think 
I  would  rather  it  should  be  written  on  my  tombstone, 
"He  was  sturdy,  faithful,  and  true,  "than  to  have  it 
written,  "he  was  eloquent,  learned,  and  great." 

Thus  he  went  from  session  to  session  and  term  to 
term,  a  little  broader  and  stronger  each  year,  a  little 
more  confident  in  himself,  a  little  better  understood. 
Gradually  he  became  known  among  his  brother  Senators 
as  one  who  could  always  be  relied  upon,  who  had  no 
axes  of  his  own  to  grind,  and  who  thought  and  acted 
truthfully.  It  was  not  long  before  they  found  out  that 
he  was  a  good  lawyer  and  that  his  judgment  was  always 
sure  to  be  nearly  right.  In  the  intimate  association 
which  comes  from  continued  service  in  a  comparatively 
small  body  they  grew  to  trust  him  and  to  like  him.  He 
made  no  enemies  in  the  Senate,  any  more  than  in 
Meriden;  and  he  did  in  the  Senate  exactly  as  in  Meriden, 


Development  of  a  Lawmaker  63 

except  that  the  things  he  had  to  do  and  the  questions 
he  had  to  study  carried  a  wider  range.  He  had  no 
fads.  He  did  not  delude  himself  with  the  notion  that 
he  was  clothed  with  a  mission.  He  attended  to  each 
day's  work  religiously,  and  when  one  task  was  com 
pleted  he  laid  it  aside  to  take  up  another.  To  every 
question  big  or  little  he  gave  the  same  painstaking 
conscientious  consideration,  and  tried  to  get  at  the 
kernel  of  truth  in  it  no  matter  how  tough  the  rind, 
without  giving  a  thought  to  whether  getting  at  it  would 
increase  his  reputation  or  not.  He  used  to  be  in  his 
place  whenever  the  Senate  was  in  session,  and  those 
who  had  questionable  measures  in  hand  learned  to 
dread  his  slowly  spoken  "Let  that  go  over."  Some 
times  he  was  called  a  "  watch -dog  of  the  Treasury,  "  but 
he  did  not  like  the  name  and  it  did  not  fairly  belong  to 
him.  He  was  not  an  indiscriminate  objector,  but  he 
wanted  the  Senate  to  know  what  it  was  doing  before  it 
passed  a  bill.  So  it  came  about  that  Senators  got  in 
the  way  of  going  to  him  for  information  and  advice, 
and  of  saying  among  themselves,  "What  does  Platt 
think  of  it?"  before  making  up  their  minds.  Years 
before  he  gained  much  reputation  outside  the  Senate 
chamber,  he  was  regarded  there  as  one  of  the  most 
effective  men  in  public  life.  When  he  died,  Senator 
Cullom,  who  had  served  with  him  more  than  twenty 
years,  expressed  of  him  an  opinion  to  which  every  other 
Senator  would  doubtless  give  assent: 

Senator  Platt  was  capable  in  more  ways  to  do  what 
the  exigencies  of  the  day  from  time  to  time  put  upon  him, 
than  any  other  man  in  the  Senate.  He  was  always  at 
his  post  of  duty, — always  watchful  in  caring  for  the  in 
terests  of  the  country,  always  just  and  fair  to  all  alike, 
and  was  always  careful  and  conservative  in  determining 


64  Orville  H.  Platt 

what  his  duty  should  be  in  the  disposition  of  any  public 
question ;  and  his  judgment  was  a  little  more  exactly  right 
than  that  of  any  other  Senator. 

It  was  only  natural  that  he  should  be  entrusted  with 
work  of  steadily  increasing  importance  as  time  went  by. 
When  Congress  was  ready  for  Federal  supervision  of 
railroads,  he  had  been  eight  years  a  Senator  and  by 
common  consent  he  was  assigned  to  the  special  com 
mittee  having  that  question  in  hand.  When  at  the 
beginning  of  the  tariff  agitation  of  1887  the  Finance 
Committee  were  looking  for  help,  they  turned  intuitively 
to  Platt,  because  he  was  painstaking,  thorough,  and 
dependable,  and  even  before  the  way  was  open  to  make 
him  formally  a  member  of  the  committee  he  was  one 
of  the  props  of  the  majority  in  everything  relating  to 
tariff  and  finance;  when  they  were  looking  for  some 
body  whom  they  could  trust  in  the  devious  windings 
of  Indian  legislation,  their  eyes  fell  easily  upon  Platt; 
when  the  Judiciary  Committee  wanted  a  sane,  careful, 
and  tactful  associate,  they  thought  first  of  Platt;  and 
every  added  responsibility  he  assumed  without  eagerness 
or  protest,  regardless  of  whether  the  new  duties  were 
likely  to  be  congenial  or  not.  He  never  pressed  his 
claims  for  assignment  to  any  particular  committee,  but 
was  willing  to  let  the  regular  processes  of  the  Senate 
work  in  their  own  way.  He  was  considerate  of  the 
feelings  of  others  and  never  blocked  the  path  of  his  more 
ambitious  associates.  So  in  course  of  years  he  gained 
authority  among  his  fellows,  begotten  of  understanding 
and  confidence,  and  when  the  war  with  Spain  came  on 
with  its  weighty  questions  to  be  solved,  the  Senate 
turned  to  him  with  general  assent  as  one  well  qualified 
to  help  in  their  solution.  That  his  name  should  have 


Development  of  a  Lawmaker  65 

been  attached  to  the  Platt  Amendment  and  so  become 
familiar  everywhere  was  merely  an  incident;  for  his 
work  in  relation  to  the  Platt  Amendment  was  in  line 
with  what  he  had  been  doing  right  along,  service 
which  was  valued  by  those  who  kept  track  of  legislation, 
but  which,  owing  to  his  own  indifference  to  contempo 
rary  fame,  never  brought  him  the  popular  recognition 
he  deserved.  Had  the  Platt  Amendment  never  been 
framed,  he  would  have  had  a  high  place  in  the  records 
of  the  Senate  just  the  same. 

He  was  no  orator.  He  had  no  faculty  for  rousing 
enthusiasm,  and  was  quite  lacking  in  the  personal 
magnetism  which  sways  men  in  masses  and  which  his 
colleague  Hawley  had  in  such  generous  measure.  Public 
speaking  had  no  glitter  or  charm  for  him.  It  was  rarely 
that  he  experienced  the  responsive  tingle  that  comes 
from  popular  applause.  He  regretted  his  own  short 
coming  as  he  acknowledged  Hawley's  gift;  but  he  never 
disclosed  a  trace  of  envy  because  Hawley  had  what 
he  did  not  possess.  He  has  been  described  as  sitting  in 
the  Senate,  almost  lounging  in  his  chair,  which  for  years 
was  in  the  front  row  directly  under  the  eye  of  the 
presiding  officer,  his  head  often  thrown  back  as  if  half 
asleep,  or  bent  forward  over  his  desk  as  though  he  were 
thinking  of  other  things.  But  the  questions  he  asked 
or  the  suggestions  he  made  from  time  to  time  showed 
that  he  was  following  closely  what  was  going  on.  When 
he  rose  to  speak,  he  used  slowly  to  stretch  his  arms  over 
the  desk,  unbend  his  legs,  and  get  to  his  feet  by  de 
grees,  as  if  hesitating  what  to  say  or  whether  to  speak 
at  all.  Whenever  he  had  anything  on  his  mind  he  said 
it  without  waiting  to  see  whether  the  galleries  were  full 
or  empty.  He  had  a  way  of  talking  straight  on, 
slowly  and  deliberately,  using  homely  phrases  and  few 


66  Orville  H.  Platt 

adjectives,  with  a  simplicity  and  directness  that  carried 
conviction  of  his  sincerity  no  matter  whether  the  listener 
agreed  with  him  or  not.  He  was  never  extravagant  in 
statement,  and  after  he  had  made  a  positive  assertion 
there  were  few  who  were  reckless  enough  to  dispute  it. 
Though  having  little  of  the  art  of  oratory,  yet  in  the 
scriptural  dignity  of  his  diction  he  sometimes  rose  to 
heights  which  could  not  be  surpassed  by  those  more 
skilled  in  rhetoric.  He  was  not  a  frequent  speaker. 
He  never  took  the  floor  unless  he  had  something 
pertinent  to  propose,  some  argument  to  elucidate,  or 
some  misunderstanding  to  set  right.  He  seldom  made 
a  set  speech.  Outside  an  occasional  eulogy,  through 
all  his  service  in  the  Senate,  their  number  could  almost 
be  counted  on  one's  ringers.  Whatever  he  said  was 
prompted  by  the  circumstances  of  the  moment ;  because 
he  had  something  in  his  head  which  nobody  else  was 
likely  to  put  exactly  as  he  would  like  to  see  it  expressed. 
When  on  the  occasion  of  a  public  meeting  or  dinner  he 
was  obliged  to  prepare  an  address,  he  used  to"  agonize  " 
over  it,  to  borrow  one  of  his  own  words,  and  even  to  the 
last  he  dreaded  setting  down  in  advance  of  delivery 
what  he  was  expected  to  say.  "  Pumping  water  out 
of  a  dry  well,"  he  called  it.  As  a  lawyer,  he  would  have 
appealed  more  effectively  to  a  bench  of  judges  than  to 
a  jury,  and  that,  as  it  happens,  is  just  the  quality  which 
gets  a  man  a  hearing  in  the  Senate. 

After  his  death,  a  writer  who  knew  him  well  gave 
this  truthful  picture  of  his  appearance  in  debate : 

Physically  Senator  Platt  was  no  less  noteworthy 
than  mentally.  In  his  later  years  he  used  to  be  likened 
to  a  Hebrew  prophet.  Once  suggested,  that  thought  was 
never  forgotten  as  one  looked  at  him.  There  was  a  rugged 
strength  in  the  sharp-cut  features,  strong  and  individual 


Development  of  a  Lawmaker  67 

as  though  chiselled  in  hard  gray  stone,  an  austerity  in  the 
moulding  of  the  mouth,  in  the  outline  of  the  jaw  beneath  the 
short  gray  beard,  in  the  whole  pose  of  the  man — he  must 
have  stood  six  feet  four  inches  tall — that  stamped  him  a 
ruler.  He  was  slender  and  graceful,  too,  in  his  carriage 
despite  the  slight  bend  that  came  with  the  years,  and  his 
head  was  ever  erect.  His  attitude  as  he  addressed  the 
Senate  was  always  the  same.  With  one  foot  slightly 
advanced,  and  with  one  hand  pressed  on  the  desk  beside 
him  so  that  he  leaned  slightly  from  the  shoulders,  he 
would  stand  with  his  head  thrown  back  and  speak  slowly 
and  briefly  without  gesture,  speaking  distinctly  but  in  a 
quiet  tone,  looking  upward  rather  than  at  his  listeners,  and 
weighing  each  word  as  he  uttered  it,  as  if  he  had  fused  all 
the  factors  of  the  problem  in  the  crucible  of  his  mind  and 
were  but  reporting  in  the  minimum  of  words  the  conscien 
tious  result.  There  was  no  borrowed  effect  of  impressive- 
ness  ;  he  was  naturally  impressive  or  austere  in  the  severe 
simplicity  of  his  manner.  He  often  or  commonly  qualified 
his  statements  with  a  slow  "it  seems  to  me"  that  added 
rather  than  subtracted  weight.1 

As  he  continued  in  service  and  became  one  of  the 
veterans  of  the  Senate,  his  unselfish  helpfulness  was 
more  and  more  in  evidence,  so  that  he  had  the  affection 
of  his  associates  as  well  as  their  esteem.  Sometimes 
he  felt  that  work  was  being  heaped  upon  him  beyond 
his  power  to  endure,  but  no  matter  what  it  was  he  never 
thought  of  shirking.  "  I  am  nothing  but  a  dray-horse 
anyway/'  he  said,  "and  I  suppose  that  I  must  pull  the 
load  as  long  as  I  can  stand" ;  and  another  time  he  wrote : 
"  I  would  rather  be  an  old  work-horse  drawing  my  daily 
load  than  an  old  race-horse  turned  out  to  pasture." 

After  he  had  been  in  the  Senate  a  good  many  years,  a 
newspaper  asked  him  to  answer  the  question : 

i  The  Springfield  Republican,  April  22,  1905. 


68  Orville  H.  Platt 

"  What  must  a  young  man  do  to  become  a  Senator 
of  the  United  States  ? "  The  reply  he  made  is  suggestive 
of  the  spirit  in  which  he  carried  on  his  work : 

In  reply  to  your  question  I  would  say:  First,  that  a 
young  man  had  better  not  have  such  an  ambition,  as  he 
will  only  be  disappointed  if  he  achieves  it;  because  the 
life  of  a  United  States  Senator  is  one  of  hard  work,  which 
is  never  understood  and  never  appreciated.  If  the  young 
man  simply  desires  to  obtain  the  place  for  any  credit  or 
honor  that  may  pertain  to  it,  and  if  that  fills  his  ambition 
without  regard  to  what  he  may  achieve  as  a  Senator,  that 
is  one  thing ;  but  the  Senate  is  much  like  the  old-time  school- 
house — divided  into  classes.  If  a  man  is  to  get  into  the 
first  class  and  sit  on  the  first  bench  he  has  got  to  do  it  by 
intense  study  and  work,  and  whatever  class  he  may  be  in  he 
only  "  goes  up  one  "  because  of  some  superiority.  This  is  an 
immense  country;  subjects  of  legislation  embrace  the  widest 
range,  and  require  the  widest  information;  and  to  act 
intelligently  a  Senator  must  possess  the  widest  information 
about  every  subject.  The  greater  his  information  the  more 
useful  he  becomes.  Add  to  this  that  he  is  expected  to  be 
the  agent  of  every  one  in  his  State  who  has  business  in 
Washington,  legislative,  political,  or  commercial — and  you 
obtain  a  glimpse  of  what  a  Senator  must  do  and  be  to  obtain 
a  successful  reputation. 

Second — If  in  spite  of  my  advice  any  young  man  will 
persist  in  cherishing  the  ambition  you  name,  his  whole 
life  should  be  a  study  of  political  affairs.  The  Senatorship 
may  be  thrust  on  him;  it  may  come  as  the  result  of  wealth, 
which  follows  business  enterprise ;  but  the  clean  and  honor 
able  road  to  it  is  through  a  study  of  public  affairs,  and  the 
capacity  to  impress  the  people  of  his  State  with  the  idea 
that  he  possesses  a  thorough  knowledge  of  them  and  will 
be  their  true  representative. 

Third — His  idea  of  politics  should  be  a  lofty  one.  His 
motive  for  devotion  to  public  life  should  be  that  he  may 


Development  of  a  Lawmaker  69 

render  service  to  the  people  rather  than  to  accomplish  per 
sonal  success.  Few  men  will  ever  reach  the  Senate  as  a 
result  of  a  talent  for  political  manipulation,  and  those  who 
thus  succeed  will  be  senatorial  nonentities  rather  than 
senatorial  leaders. 

As  he  grew  older  he  was  spared  the  common  failing 
of  the  old,  a  loss  of  mental  elasticity.  Instead,  his 
faculties  seemed  constantly  to  expand  so  as  to  embrace 
new  themes  of  national  interest,  and  at  his  death,  in 
all  that  goes  to  constitute  a  public  servant  he  was 
intellectually  younger  than  most  of  his  associates  who 
could  not  count  so  many  years.  He  seemed  to  have 
learned  the  secret  of  perpetual  youth,  so  that  when  the 
end  came  at  the  age  of  nearly  fourscore  the  blow  was 
as  unexpected  as  though  he  had  been  a  young  man  of 
promise  just  entering  upon  a  new  career. 

When  the  venerable  Henry  Clay  Trumbull  congratu 
lated  him  on  his  last  election  to  the  Senate,  he  replied : 

You  speak  of  growing  old.  Of  course,  the  days  are 
told  off,  one  by  one,  and  they  go  pretty  rapidly  some 
times,  especially  down  here  during  a  session  of  Congress, 
but  so  far  as  a  man's  actual  age  by  years  is  concerned, 
that  does  not  amount  to  much.  I  count  no  man  old, 
who  lives  in  the  present,  and  thinks  in  the  future. 


CHAPTER  VII 

SAVIOUR  OF  THE  PATENT  SYSTEM 

Chairman  of  the  Patents  Committee — Preserving  the  Patent  System 
— Speech  of  March  24,  1884 — Friend  of  the  American  Inventor. 

ILLUSTRATIVE  of  the  spirit  which  guided  theSena- 
I  tor  through  years  of  unselfish  service  was  his  work 
for  the  inventors  of  the  United  States.  From  the  begin 
ning  almost  to  the  very  end  of  his  career,  he  gladly  gave 
himself  without  reserve  to  what  to  others  might  have 
seemed  a  thankless  task,  the  shaping  of  patent  legis 
lation  and  the  prevention  of  vicious  patent  laws.  On 
all  questions  relating  to  these  subjects,  he  spoke  with 
unchallenged  authority.  It  did  not  bring  him  general 
reputation ;  for  newspapers  do  not  advertise  such  quiet 
success.  They  save  their  headlines  for  spectacular 
effects,  the  melodrama  and  extravaganza  of  the  legis 
lative  stage.  But  what  he  accomplished  brought  him 
the  satisfaction  of  work  far-reaching  and  well  done,  and 
that  was  all  he  cared  for.  If  he  lost  the  passing  noto 
riety  of  the  day,  he  wrote  his  name  in  shining  letters  in 
the  history  of  American  Invention  where  it  will  be  read 
in  years  to  come. 

Beyond  most  men,  he  realized  the  poetry  of  patents, 
—invention's  most  effective  stimulant  and  lure.  The 
time  in  which  we  live  he  liked  to  call  the  age  of  machin 
ery,  and  through  it  he  believed  the  world  was  about  to 
enter,  if  it  had  not  already  entered,  a  spiritual  age 

70 


Saviour  of  the  Patent  System  71 

when  mind  should  triumph  over  matter,  brain  over 
muscle,  when  man  should  conquer  nature's  forces  and 
make  them  all  his  slaves.  For  him  the  wonderful 
advancement  in  the  realm  of  science  and  in  the  develop 
ment  of  the  mechanic  arts  was  not  the  mark  of  a 
materialistic  time ;  it  was  the  evidence  of  higher  things. 
For  him  an  engine  had  the  beauty  of  a  sculptor's 
masterpiece ;  its  rhythm  was  the  music  of  the  progress  of 
mankind.  Books  without  number  had  been  written 
to  tell  us  of  the  noble  influence  upon  the  character  of 
man  exerted  by  the  scenes  in  which  he  dwells  — "  by 
mountain  and  forest,  by  brook  and  river  and  ocean,  by 
clear  sky  and  fleecy  clouds,  by  the  rare  tints  of  sunset 
and  dawn,  by  breaking  billow  and  roaring  blasts,"  but 
who  should  write,  he  asked,  of  that  greater  and  subtler 
moulding  influence  exerted  upon  the  character  of  man 
by  his  subjection  of  the  forces  of  the  earth  and  air  to  be 
his  ministering  spirits: 

Compare  the  man  who  muses  on  nature,  who  drinks 
in  the  influence  of  the  mountain  from  afar,  with  the  man 
who  pierces  that  mountain  to  make  a  highway  for  the  dis 
tribution  of  the  world's  products,  or  digs  out  from  their 
dungeon  the  imprisoned  metals,  to  be  wrought  into  imple 
ments  for  his  own  use,  and  tell  me  which  man  grows  most 
and  best.  Which  is  the  most  of  a  man,  he  who  gazes  with 
awe  on  the  dark  storm-cloud  and  sees  in  the  lightning  only 
the  manifestation  of  the  wrath  of  an  angry  God,  or  he 
who  subdues  the  lightning  and  makes  it  his  servant  and 
sends  it  to  and  fro  on  missions  of  mercy  and  sympathy 
to  his  fellow-man  ? 1 

Having  this  vision  it  is  not  strange  that  he  discovered 

»  Address  before  the  Congress  in  celebration  of  the  beginning 
of  the  Second  Century  of  the  American  Patent  System,  April  9^ 
1891. 


72  Orville  H.  Platt 

the  most  significant  event  between  the  founding  of  the 
government  and  the  Civil  War,  not  in  the  crowded 
pages  of  political  history,  but  in  the  little-known  Act 
of  1836,  which  under  the  express  authority  of  the 
Constitution  created  the  Patent  Office,  and  gave  Ameri 
can  inventors  their  first  substantial  recognition;  nor 
was  it  to  be  wondered  that  he  found  congenial  occupa 
tion  in  the  task  set  for  him  of  preserving  the  integrity 
of  that  act  and  blocking  the  schemes  of  those  who  would 
have  done  it  to  its  death.  He  logically  became  a 
member  of  the  Patents  Committee  at  the  beginning  of 
his  first  Congress.  There  was  a  vacancy  caused  by 
the  retirement  of  his  predecessor,  Barnum,  and  Platt 
was  thought  to  be  a  good  man  for  the  place  because  his 
practice  at  home  had  much  to  do  with  patent  law.  It 
was  natural,  too,  that  Connecticut  should  be  repre 
sented  on  the  Committee,  because  in  proportion  to  her 
population  she  stands  at  the  head  of  all  the  States  in  the 
number  of  patents  issued  to  her  citizens.  When  the 
Republicans  secured  control  in  i88i,he  became  Chair 
man  of  the  Committee  and  served  as  chairman  ten  years 
in  all,  one  period  of  six  years  ending  in  1887,  when  he 
went  to  the  head  of  the  Committee  on  Territories,  the 
other  period  of  four  years  terminating  in  1899,  when  he 
was  entrusted  with  the  great  responsibility  of  the 
newly  created  Committee  on  Relations  with  Cuba.  He 
was  a  member  of  the  Committee  until  1903,  and  to  the 
end  of  his  service  in  the  Senate  he  was  looked  upon  as 
the  highest  authority  in  Congress  on  patent  law.  To 
reproduce  his  record  would  be  to  recite  the  catalogue 
of  legislation  during  all  that  time,  and  he  had  to  handle 
some  of  the  most  important  measures  affecting  patents 
and  copyrights  enacted  during  the  last  three  quarters 
of  a  century. 


Saviour  of  the  Patent  System  73 

About  the  time  he  became  Chairman  of  the  Com 
mittee,  the  farmers  of  the  West  were  up  in  arms  on 
account  of  what  they  regarded  as  the  extortions  of 
those  who  held  the  patents  on  barbed  wire  and  driven 
wells.  The  question  was  rapidly  getting  into  politics, 
and  there  was  danger  that  Congress  would  try  to  ap 
pease  them  by  passing  general  legislation  which  would 
work  hardship  to  innocent  inventors  not  involved  in 
the  dispute.  Mr.  Platt  was  disturbed  by  the  prospect, 
and  tried  to  appease  the  discontent  by  moderate  legisla 
tion.  One  of  the  first  bills  he  introduced  and  reported 
as  Chairman  of  the  Committee  in  1882  was  to  regulate 
practice  in  patent  suits.  It  provided  that  where  a 
defendant  innocently  bought  a  patented  article  or 
device  for  his  own  personal  use  and  the  plaintiff  did  not 
recover  more  than  twenty  dollars,  no  costs  should,  be 
recovered  of  the  plaintiff.  He  tried  to  get  a  vote  on 
the  bill  in  the  Senate,  but  amendments  were  moved 
and  objections  interposed.  "  There  are  two  sides  to  be 
considered  here,"  he  pleaded: 

There  are  those  who  suffer  from  the  acts  of  unprincipled 
men,  and  there  are  honest  patentees  throughout  the  coun 
try.  The  rights  of  both  parties  are  to  be  considered,  and 
I  do  not  think  that  the  people,  particularly  at  the  West, 
who  have  been  imposed  upon  and  made  to  pay  money 
unreasonably  and  improperly,  want  to  insist  upon  any  bill 
or  any  amendment  to  this  bill  which  will  work  a  hardship 
to  the  honest  patentee. 

The  bill  went  over;  the  pressure  on  Congress  con 
tinued  ;  but  it  was  two  years  before  anything  else  was 
done. 

The  first  session  of  the  Forty-eighth  Congress  in  1884 
is  memorable  in  the  history  of  American  invention. 
Mr.  Platt  was  serving  a  second  term  as  Chairman  of 


74  Orville  H.  Platt 

the  Patents  Committee  and  it  fell  to  him  to  save  the 
patent  system  from  serious  injury.  The  House  of 
Representatives  early  in  the  session  passed  a  bill  to 
regulate  procedure  in  patent  suits  in  cases  of  infringe 
ment  by  innocent  users  and  purchasers  of  patented 
devices.  It  was  intended  to  remedy  the  evils  com 
plained  of  by  the  farmers  but  its  provisions  were  drastic. 
The  true  nature  and  effect  of  the  measure  do  not  seem 
to  have  been  clearly  understood.  It  passed  the  House 
without  debate  under  suspension  of  the  rules,  and  when 
it  came  to  the  Senate,  the  Patents  Committee  in 
structed  the  Chairman  to  report  it  favorably.  No 
sooner  did  the  inventors  of  the  United  States  begin  to 
realize  what  was  going  on  than  a  storm  of  protest  arose 
which  soon  reached  the  halls  of  Congress.  It  was 
contended  that  the  suggested  change  would  destroy 
the  usefulness  of  the  Patent  Office  and  bring  American 
inventive  genius  to  a  pause. 

Mr.  Platt,  against  the  judgment  of.  the  majority  of 
his  committee,  set  to  work  to  prevent  the  injury  which 
was  threatened.  On  March  24,  1884,  hardly  a  month 
from  the  time  the  bill  had  been  reported,  he  introduced 
a  bill  of  his  own  which  was  intended  to  fix  the  attention 
of  the  Senate  upon  the  patent  system  in  a  way  which 
would  react  against  unfriendly  legislation.  The  bill 
proposed  to  make  an  independent  department  of  the 
Patent  Office,  divorcing  it  from  the  Interior  Depart 
ment  under  which  it  was  placed,  and  giving  it  a  status 
like  that  of  the  Department  of  Agriculture,  which  at 
that  time  was  presided  over  by  a  commissioner,  and  not 
by  a  cabinet  officer.  The  bill  also  gave  to  the  Patent 
Office  exclusive  control  of  the  building  now  known  as 
the  Interior  Department,  and  of  the  fund  pertaining 
to  the  office.  A  few  days  after  introducing  this  bill, 


Saviour  of  the  Patent  System  75 

Mr.  Platt  delivered  a  speech  in  support  of  it  which  was 
regarded  at  the  time  as  the  best  defence  ever  made  of 
the  American  patent  system,  and  which,  betraying 
extraordinary  thoroughness  of  research,  remains  to 
day  the  most  comprehensive  and  authoritative  public 
utterance  concerning  its  development.  He  said: 

The  growth  of  our  patent  system,  its  vast  importance, 
its  intimate  connection  with  and  direct  influence  upon 
the  property  of  the  country  demand  that  it  shall  receive  a 
degree  of  attention  which  it  can  not  and  will  not  receive 
while  it  remains  a  merely  subordinate  bureau  of  the 
Interior  Department. 

After  tracing  the  history  of  the  patent  system  to  its 
origin  in  the  grant  of  enumerated  powers  in  the  Con 
stitution,  he  declared  that  to  his  mind  the  passage  of 
the  Act  of  1836,  creating  the  Patent  Office,  was  the 
most  important  event  in  the  history  of  the  Government, 
prior  to  the  War  of  the  Rebellion.  He  presented  pages 
of  statistics  to  show  that  the  unexampled  progress  of 
the  United  States  had  been  dependent  upon  and  co 
incident  with  the  growth  and  development  of  the  patent 
system : 

All  history  confirms  us  in  the  conclusion  that  it  is  the 
development,  by  the  mechanic  arts,  of  the  industries  of  a 
country,  which  brings  to  it  greatness  and  power  and  glory. 
No  purely  agricultural,  pastoral  people  ever  achieved  any 
high  standing  among  the  nations  of  the  earth.  It  is  only 
when  the  brain  evolves  and  the  cunning  hand  fashions 
labor-saving  machines  that  a  nation  begins  to  throb  with 
new  energy  and  life  and  expands  with  a  new  growth.  It 
is  only  when  thought  wrings  from  nature  her  untold  secret 
treasures  that  solid  wealth  and  strength  are  accumulated 
by  a  people.  Especially  is  this  true  in  a  republic.  Under 
arbitrary  forms  of  government  kings  may  oppress  the 


76  Orville  H.  Platt 

laborer,  kings  may  conquer  other  nations,  may  oppress  and 
degrade  the  men  who  till  the  soil,  and  they  may  thus  acquire 
wealth;  but  in  a  republic  it  is  only  when  the  citizen  con 
quers  nature,  appropriates  her  resources,  and  extorts  her 
riches  that  you  find  real  wealth  and  power. 

We  witness  our  development ;  we  are  proud  of  our  success ; 
we  congratulate  ourselves,  we  felicitate  ourselves  on  all 
that  we  enjoy;  but  we  scarcely  ever  stop  to  think  of  the 
cause  of  all  this  prosperity  and  enjoyment.  Indeed,  this 
prosperity  has  become  so  common  that  we  expect  it.  Many 
men  forget  to  what  they  owe  it ;  many  men  I  am  sorry  to  say 
in  these  recent  years  deny  the  cause  of  it  all.  The  truth 
is,  we  live  in  this  atmosphere  of  invention ;  it  surrounds 
us  as  does  the  light  and  the  air;  like  light  and  air  it  is  one 
of  our  greatest  blessings;  and  yet  we  pass  it  by  without 
thought.  Some  say  that  the  cause  of  all  this  wealth,  of 
all  this  influence  in  the  world,  springs  from  other  sources; 
some  say  it  is  the  result  of  our  free  institutions,  of  our 
Christian  civilization,  of  our  habits  of  industry,  of  our 
respect  for  the  law,  of  the  vastness  of  our  natural  resources, 
but  I  say  inventive  skill  is  the  primal  cause  of  all  this  pro 
gress  and  growth.  I  say  the  policy  which  found  expression 
in  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  when  this  clause 
was  enacted,  giving  Congress  power  "to  promote  the  pro 
gress  of  science  and  useful  arts  by  securing  for  limited  times 
to  authors  and  inventors  the  exclusive  right  to  their 
respective  writings  and  discoveries,"  has  been  the  policy 
that  has  built  up  this  fair  fabric. 

Concede  all  you  claim:  Free  institutions,  Christian 
civilization,  industrious  habits,  great  respect  for  law; 
acknowledge  all  our  vast  natural  resources;  and  then  de 
duct  patents  and  patented  inventions  from  the  causes 
which  have  led  to  this  development,  and  you  have  sub 
tracted  from  material,  yes,  from  moral,  prosperity  nearly 
all  that  is  worth  enjoying.  Subtract  invention  from  the 
causes  which  have  led  to  our  growth  and  our  grandeur  and 
you  remit  us,  you  remit  our  people,  to  the  condition  of 


Saviour  of  the  Patent  System  77 

the  people  of  Italy,  of  Switzerland,  of  Russia.     If  "know 
ledge  is  power,"  invention  is  prosperity. 

Let  us  turn  a  moment  from  the  present  and  take  one 
rapid  glance  at  the  past.  Consider  the  country  as  it 
was  fifty  years  ago.  The  cotton-gin,  the  steamboat,  the 
railroad,  the  power-loom,  the  printing-press,  were  indeed 
in  embryo,  but  their  development  was  partial  and  their 
use  was  extremely  limited.  It  was  still  the  age  of  home 
spun;  it  was  still  the  age  of  hand  labor.  Brain  had  not, 
so  far  as  production  was  concerned,  superseded  muscle. 
We  had  then  twenty-six  States.  When  the  commencement 
of  our  present  patent  system  really  began,  there  were 
twenty-six  States  in  the  Union.  Twelve  new  ones  and 
eight  Territories  added  since  are  in  my  judgment  a  tribute 
to  the  inventive  genius  of  this  country  and  to  the  perfection 
of  its  patent  system. 

Three  classes  of  men  had  made  possible  the  advance 
ment  of  the  United  States  in  material  prosperity: 
First,  the  inventors;  second,  the  manufacturers;  third 
the  skilled  laborers.  The  farmer  had  become  a  skilled 
laborer.  "  He  purchases  a  machine.  He  no  longer 
toils  with  the  rude  implements  of  the  past."  Without 
patents,  the  agriculture  of  the  day  would  be  impossible, 
and  a  large  proportion  of  the  agricultural  lands  of  the 
country  would  be  inaccessible.  Without  the  use  of 
patents,  the  entire  population  capable  of  labor  in  the 
country  could  not  raise  the  cereal  productions  and  get 
the  surplus  to  a  market.  He  denied  that  inventions 
were  opposed  to  the  interests  of  labor.  Whenever  a 
labor-saving  machine  is  invented,  there  is  no  destruc 
tion  of  labor,  but  redistribution.  The  man  relieved 
from  a  particular  kind  of  labor  by  the  introduction  of  a 
mechanical  device  engages  in  some  higher  employment. 
New  inventions  open  new  fields  of  labor.  Patents  are 
educators.  The  man  who  lives  in  the  atmosphere  of 


78  Orville  H.  Platt 

invention  produces  more  than  the  one  who  does  not. 
The  man  who  learns  to  operate  a  complicated  machine 
acquires  education  of  as  much  real  value  as  the  man 
who  learns  to  conjugate  Greek  verbs.  "  There  is  an 
education  of  the  college;  there  is  also  an  education  of 
the  factory  and  the  field.  We  may  not  despise  or  neg 
lect  either."  He  contended  that  the  right  of  the 
inventor  was  as  much  entitled  to  the  protection  of  the 
Government  as  any  other  species  of  property;  that  it 
was  excelled  in  point  of  dignity  by  no  other  property 
right  whatever,  and  was  equalled  in  point  of  dignity 
only  by  the  rights  which  authors  have  in  their  copy 
righted  books.  The  property  in  patents  was  a  property 
which  contained  within  itself  the  principle  of  the 
reproduction  of  property,  and  that  was  a  characteristic 
which  attached  to  no  other  species  of  property.  Every 
patent  had  in  it  the  germ  of  a  new  patent,  which  in 
time  was  property: 

Nature  is  one  vast  storehouse  of  wealth,  but  it  is  a 
locked  storehouse,  and  the  human  brain  alone  can  unlock 
it.  Invention  is  the  magic  key?  Men  seek  gold  in  the 
bowels  of  the  earth,  but  it  lies  in  the  air,  in  light,  in  the 
gases,  in  electricity.  It  needs  no  enchanter's  wand,  no 
talismanic  words  to  set  it  free — only  the  processes  of 
thought.  .  .  . 

We  stand  but  in  the  very  vestibule  of  the  great  store 
houses  of  nature's  secrets.  We  have  but  gathered  a 
few  pebbles  along  the  shore  on  which  beats  a  limitless  sea. 
.  .  .  We  live  in  a  wonderland.  The  miracle  of  yesterday 
is  the  commonplace  of  to-day.  The  dream  of  the  present 
is  to  be  the  fact  of  the  immediate  future. 

He  had  heard  it  said  that  men  would  have  invented 
without  regard  to  the  encouragement  given  to  them  by 
our  patent  laws;  that,  even  if  their  property  in  patents 


Saviour  of  the  Patent  System  79 

were  not  protected,  they  would  have  gone  on  inventing 
all  the  same ;  that  there  had  been  in  some  way  a  mar 
vellous  birth  in  this  country  of  inventive  capacity,  and 
that  it  must  grow  whether  protected  or  not. 

It  is  not  true  [he  declared];  the  inventor  is  no  more 
a  philanthropist  than  is  the  agriculturist.  He  works 
for  his  support.  He  works  to  achieve  a  competency.  He 
invents,  if  you  please,  to  become  rich;  but  he  is  no  more 
a  philanthropist  than  any  other  man  in  any  other  walk 
or  avocation  of  life,  and  you  have  no  right  to  demand  of 
him  that  he  shall  be  a  mere  philanthropist.  He  is  en 
titled  to  his  reward.  He  is  a  laborer  entitled  to  his  hire, 
entitled  to  it  more  if  possible  than  any  other  laborer,  as 
his  labor  is  higher  in  dignity  and  grandeur  than  that  of 
any  other  laborer. 

Having  thus  dwelt  upon  the  marvels  of  invention, 
he  presented  practical  considerations  in  support  of  his 
bill.  He  said  the  Patent  Office  should  be  made  an 
independent  department,  not  only  because  of  the  vast 
importance  of  the  interests  which  it  must  care  for,  but 
because  of  the  treatment  which  it  had  received  and  must 
continue  to  receive  so  long  as  it  remained  a  subordinate 
branch  of  the  Interior  Department.  The  Interior 
Department  was  overburdened.  No  one  man  could 
discharge  its  duties  properly: 

If  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  had  as  many  heads 
as  the  Hindoo  divinity  Siva,  and  as  many  arms  as  Briareus, 
he  could  not  personally  perform  all  the  duties  pertaining 
to  his  office  that  would  be  most  acceptably  performed  if 
he  could  give  them  personal  attention. 

The  duties  to  be  performed  by  the  Secretary  in  other 
branches  of  the  Department  would  probably  always 
lead  in  the  future,  as  in  the  past,  to  the  selection  of  a 


8o  Orville  H.  Platt 

man  for  the  place  without  special  adaptation  to  the 
important  work  of  the  Patent  Office : 

Public  opinion  demands  that  the  Secretary  of  the  In 
terior  must  have  denned  ideas  relating  to  the  Indian 
policy;  that  he  must  have  a  knowledge  of  the  laws  relating 
to  the  Indian  policy;  that  he  must  have  a  knowledge  of 
the  laws  relating  to  public  lands;  that  he  must  under 
stand  the  operation  of  the  railroads  in  their  relation  to  the 
Government;  that  he  must  have  a  territorial  knowledge 
which  will  enable  him  to  administer,  so  far  as  his  duty 
requires,  the  affairs  of  the  Territories.  He  must  have  been 
trained  in  a  different  school  from  the  man  who  should  be 
selected  for  Commissioner  of  Patents  or  for  the  head  of  the 
Patent  Department.  Let  me  illustrate. 

If  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  is  to  be  the  superior 
officer,  he  must  pass  upon  questions  of  administration 
which  he  cannot  so  well  understand  as  the  commissioner. 
Under  the  practice  of  the  office  he  passes  on  most  com 
plicated  questions  affecting  the  right  to  inventions.  There 
has  been  no  Secretary  of  the  Interior  within  my  knowledge 
who  has  had  any  special  adaptation  to  that  office,  who 
has  been  selected  at  all  with  reference  to  his  mechanical 
judgment  or  mechanical  skill,  or  because  of  his  superior 
understanding  of  the  complicated  questions  of  patent  law. 

The  head  of  the  Patent  Office  should  combine  an 
accurate  and  almost  universal  knowledge  of  mechanical 
principles  with  a  thorough  knowledge  of  patent  law  and 
with  rare  executive  and  administrative  ability.  His 
position  should  be  one  of  entire  independence,  as  his 
duties  are  more  judicial  than  executive.  The  office 
should  be  permanent  and  not  subject  to  political 
changes. 

Practical  arguments  there  were  why  the  entire 
building  of  the  Interior  Department  should  be  turned 
over  to  the  Patent  Office : 


Saviour  of  the  Patent  System  81 

The  space  which  is  allotted  to  the  clerical  employees  of 
the  Patent  Office  may  be  large  enough  for  a  dungeon,  it 
may  be  large  enough  for  a  tomb,  and  it  may  be  a  little  too 
large  for  a  grave,  but  it  is  not  a  fit  amount  of  room  for  a 
human  being  to  live  and  do  the  work  of  this  Government 
in.  ... 

I  have  visited  the  Patent  Office,  and  I  undertake  to  say 
that,  if  any  Senator  will  go  there  and  see  where  the  clerks 
are  performing  their  duties,  will  see  where  the  most  skilled 
experts  of  the  country,  with  the  best  scientific  attainments, 
are  performing  their  duties,  down  in  the  rooms  which, 
until  it  became  absolutely  necessary  to  have  more  space, 
were  used  only  for  coal  cellars,  huddled  together  where  the 
sunlight  rarely  or  never  shines  in  the  room,  where  there 
is  little  or  no  ventilation,  and  where  the  air  is  so  foul  that  I 
venture  to  say  no  Senator  can  stay  an  hour  without  becom 
ing  nauseated  and  sick,  I  think  he  would  have  little  doubt 
that  something  should  be  done  not  only  to  increase  the 
efficiency  of  the  office,  but  to  prevent  the  almost  barbarous 
treatment  of  its  employees. 

And  yet  this  "  pauper  whom  nobody  owns  "  was  the 
only  self-sustaining  branch  of  the  Government,  with  a 
fund  to  its  credit  of  $2,727,107,  "not  including  the 
amount  that  Congress  took  from  its  fund  to  help  pay 
for  the  building,  into  the  basement  and  coal  cellars  of 
which  it  has  been  largely  crowded." 

The  bill  which  Mr.  Platt  introduced  served  only 
as  a  text  for  his  speech.  It  never  went  farther  on 
the  legislative  road,  but  that  it  was  not  framed  in 
vain  appears  from  the  proceedings  of  April  2ist, 
when  Mr.  McPherson  of  New  Jersey,  presenting  a 
formidable  array  of  remonstrances  against  the  House 
and  Senate  bills  to  regulate  practice  in  patent 
suits,  moved  to  recommit  the  bills  to  the  Patents 
Committee : 


82  Orville  H.  Platt 

Considering  [he  said]  the  vast  amount  of  interests 
involved  in  this  matter,  and  considering  also  that  all  of 
these  interests  are  to  a  great  extent  imperilled  and  held 
subject  to  the  wisdom  of  Congress  touching  all  matters 
relating  to  the  patent  laws,  and  considering  further  the 
very  able  and  exhaustive  argument  made  by  the  honorable 
Chairman  of  that  Committee  (Mr.  Platt)  upon  this  subject 
a  few  days  ago,  I  have  felt  emboldened  to  ask  the  consent 
of  this  committee  to  review  its  work,  and  if  possible  present 
to  the  Senate  some  more  equitable,  some  better  mode  of 
remedying  the  evils  complained  of  than  is  found  in  the 
bills  now  before  the  Senate. 

The  motions  were  agreed  to  and  the  threatened  peril 
was  averted. 

It  was  Mr.  Platt's  lot,  during  his  long  service,  to  aid 
in  framing  many  acts  relating  to  patents,  so  that  there 
are  few  existing  laws  which  do  not  bear  his  imprint, 
and  even  in  the  last  days  of  his  life  he  was  in  conference 
with  the  leaders  of  the  American  bar,  with  reference  to 
reform  in  the  patent  laws  still  to  be.  secured.  But 
though  he  had  done  nothing  else,  the  service  he  ren 
dered  in  the  Forty-eighth  Congress  would  have  been 
enough  to  earn  him  the  lasting  gratitude  of  American 
inventors.  c»Ni  u 


CHAPTER  VIII 

THE  WORK  FOR  INTERNATIONAL  COPYRIGHT,  1884-189! 

International  Copyright — A  Legislative  Triumph — Law  of  1891 — 
Subsequent  Legislation. 

MR.  PLATTS  name  is  justly  associated  more 
closely  than  that  of  any  other  legislator  with  the 
work  done  for  bringing  the  United  States  into  copyright 
relations  with  Europe.  Under  his  skilful  leadership, 
the  campaign  which  for  over  half  a  century  had  been 
carried  on  without  practical  results  by  the  publishers 
and  authors  of  the  United  States,  culminated  in  the 
enactment  by  the  Fifty-first  Congress  of  a  law  \vhich  for 
the  first  time  assured  to  foreign  authors  protection  in 
the  United  States  for  the  property  rights  in  their 
productions,  and  which  secured  at  the  same  time 
reciprocal  protection  in  Europe  for  the  works  of 
American  authors. 

The  question  of  international  copyright  was  first 
brought  before  Congress  in  1837,  when  Henry  Clay 
presented  an  address  from  certain  authors  of  Great 
Britain  representing  the  injury  caused  to  their  literary 
property  and  to  their  property  interests,  through  the 
want  of  a  law  securing  to  them  within  the  United 
States  the  exclusive  control  of  their  productions,  and 
requesting,  in  behalf  of  the  authors  of  Great  Britain,  a 
remedy  through  legislation.  The  address  was  referred 
to  a  select  committee  made  up  of  Henry  Clay,  William 

83 


84  Orville  H.  Platt 

C.  Preston,  James  Buchanan,  Daniel  Webster,  Thomas 
Ewing,  and  John  Ruggles,  which  committee  reported 
a  bill  for  the  amendment  of  the  copyright  statute  by 
the  addition  of  an  international  provision.  The  bill 
drafted  by  Clay  on  the  lines  of  the  report  of  the  com 
mittee  remains  one  of  the  classics  of  legislative  litera 
ture.  Memorials  urging  its  passage,  signed  by  the 
leading  writers  of  the  United  States,  among  them, 
Washington  Irving,  Edward  Everett,  Rufus  Choate, 
John  Quincy  Adams,  William  Cullen  Bryant,  and 
Robert  C.  Winthrop,  and  further  memorials  signed  by 
a  publishers'  committee,  the  representatives  of  which 
were  William  H.  Appleton  and  George  P.  Putnam, 
were  laid  before  Congress.  Petitions  were  also  sub 
mitted  in  opposition  to  the  proposed  legislation.  Mr. 
Clay  never  succeeded  in  securing  action  upon  his  bill, 
the  provisions  of  which  were  in  accord  with  the  statute 
passed  in  1891,  and  with  that  which  went  into  force  in 
1909,  in  requiring  American  manufacture  for  the  books 
securing  copyright.  It  was  presented  in  the  Senate 
five  times,  but  was  voted  upon  only  once,  in  1840, 
when  it  was  ordered  to  lie  upon  the  table. 

Between  1837  and  1842,  numerous  petitions  favor 
ing  international  copyright  were  presented  to  Congress, 
petitions  which  included  in  addition  to  the  signatures 
of  nearly  all  the  leading  authors  of  the  country,  the 
names  of  the  representatives  of  the  Publishers'  Copy 
right  League. 

In  1838,  after  the  passing  of  the  first  international 
copyright  act  in  Great  Britain,  Lord  Palmerston  invited 
the  American  Government  to  co-operate  in  shaping  a 
copyright  convention  between  the  two  countries. 

In  1842,  George  P.  Putnam  brought  again  into 
activity  the  American  Copyright  League,  and  presented 


Work  for  International  Copyright        85 

a  memorial  drafted  by  himself,  and  signed  by  ninety- 
seven  publishers  and  printers,  in  which  it  was  stated 
that  the  absence  of  an  international  copyright  was 
"  alike  injurious  to  the  business  of  publishing  and  to  the 
best  interests  of  the  people  at  large." 

In  1848,  a  memorial,  drafted  by  George  P.  Putnam 
and  signed  by  William  C.  Bryant,  John  Jay,  and  others, 
was  presented  to  Congress,  asking  for  a  copyright  meas 
ure  similar  in  principle  to  that  which  was  enacted  in 
1891.  The  memorial  was  ordered  printed  and  was 
referred  to  a  committee,  from  which  no  report  was  made. 

In  1853,  George  P.  Putnam,  writing  on  behalf  of  the 
leading  publishers  of  New  York,  including  Charles 
Scribner,  William  H.  Appleton,  Mason  Brothers,  and 
others,  addressed  a  letter  to  Mr.  Everett,  Secretary 
of  State,  recommending  the  framing  of  a  copyright 
convention  with  Great  Britain. 

Charles  Sumner,  then  Chairman  of  the  Senate  Com 
mittee  on  Foreign  Affairs,  interested  himself  in  the 
subject,  and  reported  to  the  Senate  a  treaty  drafted 
by  Edward  Everett  and  himself.  The  proposal  had 
the  approval  of  President  Fillmore,  but  it  was  met  in 
Congress  with  a  storm  of  remonstrance. 

In  1854,  President  Pierce  secured  an  additional 
article  extending  the  time  limit  for  the  exchange  of 
ratifications,  but  the  Senate  allowed  the  treaty  to  ex 
pire  without  action. 

In  1867,  Mr.  Samuel  M.  Arnell,  of  Tennessee,  secured 
the  passage  of  a  resolution  in  the  House  of  Representa 
tives  directing  the  Joint  Library  Committee  to  inquire 
into  the  subject  of  international  copyright,  and  to  make 
a  report.  Such  a  report  was  presented  to  the  House  in 
1868  by  Mr.  J.  G.  Baldwin,  of  Massachusetts,  accom 
panied  by  a  bill  which  was  based  upon  a  draft  submitted 


86  Orville  H.  Platt 

from  the  Copyright  Association  of  New  York  by  W. 
C.  Bryant,  President,  and  George  P.  Putnam,  Secretary. 
This  bill  secured  copyright  to  foreign  authors,  with  the 
condition  that  their  books  should  be  manufactured 
in  the  United  States.  It  was  referred  to  the  Joint 
Committee  on  the  Library,  from  which  it  never 
emerged. 

In  1868,  the  American  Copyright  Association  was 
reorganized  in  response  to  a  letter  headed  "  Justice  to 
Authors  and  to  Artists,"  which  was  issued  by  a  commit 
tee  comprising  George  P.  Putnam,  Dr.  S.  I.  Prime,  Henry 
Iverson,  and  James  Parton.  Of  this  Association, 
Mr.  Bryant  was  made  President.  At  the  instance  of 
this  Association,  a  bill  was  prepared,  which  was  intro 
duced  into  the  House  in  1871  by  S.  S.  Cox  of  Ohio, 
and  in  the  Senate  by  John  Sherman,  also  of  Ohio. 
The  bill,  however,  stirred  up  the  usual  flock  of  adverse 
petitions,  as  a  result  of  which  it  was  reported  unfavor 
ably  by  the  Joint  Committee  on  the  Library,  which  at 
that  time  had  charge  of  copyright  business. 

In  1870,  the  so-called  Clarendon  Treaty  was  proposed 
through  Mr.  Thornton,  the  British  Minister  at  Washing 
ton.  The  proposed  treaty  gave  to  the  authors  and 
artists  of  each  country  the  privilege  of  copyright  in  the 
other  by  registering  the  work  within  three  months  of 
the  date  of  the  original  publication. 

In  1872,  a  bill  was  again  presented  from  the  Pub 
lishers'  Association,  which  provided  that  the  American 
edition  of  the  foreign  work  securing  American  copy 
right  should  be  manufactured  in  this  country,  and  that 
the  American  register  of  copyright  should  be  made 
within  one  month  of  the  date  of  the  original  publication. 
In  the  same  year,  the  draft  of  a  bill  was  submitted  by 
Mr.  John  P.  Morton,  publisher  of  Louisville,  under  which 


Work  for  International  Copyright       87 

any  American  publisher  was  to  be  at  liberty  to  reprint 
the  work  of  a  foreign  author  on  the  condition  of  making 
payment  to  such  author  of  a  ten  per  cent,  royalty. 

Later  in  the  same  year  a  similar  measure  was  intro 
duced  by  Mr.  Beck  and  Mr.  Sherman  providing  that 
the  royalty  should  be  five  per  cent.  Both  of  these 
bills  were  buried  in  the  Library  Committee. 

In  1873,  Senator  Lot  M.  Morrill  of  Maine,  on  behalf 
of  the  Library  Committee,  reported  adversely  to  the 
consideration  by  Congress  of  any  international  copy 
right  bill  on  the  ground  that  "  there  was  no  unanimity 
of  opinion  among  those  interested  in  the  measure." 

In  1874,  Mr.  Henry  B.  Banning,  of  Ohio,  introduced 
into  the  House  the  sixth  international  copyright  bill, 
which  secured  copyright  for  foreign  authors  on  the 
simple  condition  of  reciprocity.  The  bill  was  referred 
to  the  Committee  on  Patents  where  it  remained. 

In  1878,  a  project  for  a  copyright  convention  or 
treaty  was  submitted  on  behalf  of  the  Publishers' 
Association  to  Mr.  Evarts,  then  Secretary  of  State, 
and  in  1880,  the  draft  of  a  convention  in  line  with  this 
scheme  from  the  publishers  was  submitted  by  Mr. 
Lowell  to  Lord  Granville. 

In  1880,  a  petition  was  submitted  to  Congress, 
signed  by  President  Woolsey,  of  Yale,  and  by  a  number 
of  authors,  publishers,  and  printers,  asking  for  the 
enactment  of  a  bill  extending  to  foreign  authors, 
composers,  and  designers  the  privilege  of  copyright  in 
the  United  States. 

In  1882,  Mr.  Robinson,  of  New  York,  presented  a  bill 
giving  consideration  to  the  whole  subject  of  copyright, 
domestic  and  international.  It  was  referred  to  the 
Committee  on  Patents,  where  it  was  buried. 

In  1883,  the  eighth  international  copyright  bill  was 


88  Orville  H.  Platt 

introduced  by  Mr.  Patrick  A.  Collins,  of  Massachusetts. 
This  also  was  buried  in  the  Committee  on  Patents. 

In  1884,  the  ninth  international  copyright  bill  was 
introduced  into  the  House  by  Mr.  Dorsheimer,  of  New 
York.  This  provided  simply  for  the  extension  to 
foreign  authors  of  the  privileges  enjoyed  by  the  citizens 
or  residents  of  the  United  States.  This  bill  was  ap 
proved  by  the  Copyright  League,  and  was  favorably 
reported  to  the  House  by  the  Committee  on  the 
Judiciary,  to  which  it  had  been  referred.  It  reached 
the  stage  of  being  discussed  in  the  House,  but  a  resolu 
tion  to  fix  a  date  for  its  final  consideration  was  defeated. 

President  Arthur,  in  his  first  annual  message,  reported 
to  Congress  that  negotiations  for  an  International 
Copyright  Convention  were  in  hopeful  progress.  The 
President,  however,  deemed  it  inadvisable  to  complete 
such  negotiation  until  Congress  should  by  statute  fix 
the  extent  of  the  privileges  to  be  secured  in  the  United 
States  by  foreign  holders  of  copyright.  This  country 
was  accordingly  not  represented  at  the  convention 
that  was  called  in  Berne  in  1886,  which  resulted  in 
bringing  the  states  of  Europe  into  copyright  relations 
with  each  other. 

In  the  same  year  a  bill  was  introduced  into  the  House 
by  Mr.  English  dealing  with  international  copyright 
in  dramatic  compositions.  It  was  referred  to  the 
Judiciary  Committee,  which  took  no  action. 

In  1885,  President  Cleveland  permitted  the  envoy 
of  the  United  States  to  be  present  at  the  Berne  Con 
ference  as  a  delegate,  but  without  the  power  of  com 
mitting  the  Government  to  any  action. 

In  1885,  The  American  (Authors')  Copyright  League 
was  reorganized  with  Mr.  Lowell  as  President  and  Mr. 
Stedman  as  Vice- President.  Mr.  Platt  had  long  shown  a 


Work  for  International  Copyright        89 

keen  interest  in  the  purpose  of  the  Copyright  Leagues 
and  had  come  into  personal  relations  with  a  number  of 
those  who  were  working  to  secure  justice  to  authors. 
His  first  official  connection  with  the  movement,  however, 
was  when  on  the  i3th  of  January,  1886,  he  secured 
unanimous  consent  for  a  resolution  authorizing  the 
Committee  on  Patents  to  take  testimony  relating  to  a 
bill  introduced  by  his  colleague  General  Hawley  to  es 
tablish  an  international  copyright.  The  bill  of  Senator 
Hawley  was  substantially  identical  with  that  which  had 
been  introduced  a  year  back  by  Mr.  Dorsheimer.  It 
was  referred  to  the  Senate  Committee  on  Patents.  A 
similar  bill  was  introduced  in  the  House  by  J.  Randolph 
Tucker  of  Virginia,  and  was  referred  to  the  Committee 
on  Judiciary. 

Both  committees  failed  to  make  any  report,  and  the 
cause  of  copyright  appeared,  therefore,  to  be  no  further 
advanced  than  at  the  time  when  it  was  first  brought  to 
the  attention  of  the  Senate  in  1837  by  Henry  Clay,  but 
the  leaven  of  half  a  century's  teaching  had  been 
working  both  with  the  public  and  with  Congress. 

In  1886,  President  Cleveland,  in  his  message  of 
December  6th,  gave  to  the  movement  a  more  emphatic 
endorsement  than  had  been  given  by  any  of  his  prede 
cessors.  At  the  request  of  the  representatives  of  the 
Publishers'  Committee,  Mr.  Cleveland  included  in  his 
message  the  following  paragraph: 

The  drift  of  sentiment  in  civilized  communities  toward 
full  recognition  of  the  rights  of  property  in  the  creations 
of  the  human  intellect  has  brought  about  the  adoption 
by  many  important  nations  of  an  international  copyright 
convention,  which  was  signed  at  Berne  on  the  i8th  of 
September,  1886.  Inasmuch  as  the  Constitution  gives  to 
Congress  the  power  "to  promote  the  progress  of  science  and 


9o  Orville  H.  Platt 

useful  arts  by  securing  for  limited  times  to  authors  and 
inventors  the  exclusive  right  to  their  respective  writings 
and  discoveries,"  this  Government  did  not  feel  warranted 
in  becoming  a  signatory  pending  the  action  of  Congress 
upon  measures  of  international  copyright  now  before  it, 
but  the  right  of  adhesion  to  the  Berne  Convention  here 
after  has  been  reserved.  I  trust  the  subject  will  receive 
at  your  hands  the  attention  it  deserves,  and  that  the  just 
claims  of  authors,  so  urgently  pressed,  will  be  duly  heeded. 

The  action  of  the  Convention  of  Berne  in  bringing 
into  copyright  relations  with  each  other  nearly  all  of 
the  states  of  Europe  unquestionably  had  its  effect 
upon  sentiment  in  the  United  States,  and  prepared  the 
way  for  the  work  which  was  to  be  accomplished  a  little 
later  by  Mr.  Platt  and  other  leaders  in  Congress  whose 
interest  he  had  secured  in  the  undertaking. 

The  Secretary  of  the  American  Publishers'  Copy 
right  League,  from  its  re-organization  in  1866  to  the 
present  time,  has  been  George  Haven  Putnam.  The 
Secretaries  of  the  Authors'  League  have  been  suc 
cessively  George  P.  Lathrop,  George  W.  Green,  and 
Robert  Underwood  Johnson,  who  was  elected  in  1888. 
The  two  associations  carried  on  a  systematic  campaign 
of  "education,"  as  a  result  of  which  the  press  through 
out  the  country  declared  itself  overwhelmingly  in  favor 
of  the  reform,  and  petitions  urging  copyright  law  rained 
in  upon  Congress  from  educators  and  leading  citizens 
generally. 

In  1888,  a  Joint  Campaign  Committee  was  formed, 
representing  the  authors,  publishers,  printers,  the 
Typographical  Union  and  other  interests,  which  had 
arrived  at  an  agreement  upon  a  bill  believed  to  be 
practicable.  During  the  year  ending  March,  1891,  Mr. 
Johnson  acted  as  a  secretary  of  this  joint  committee; 
and  its  Chairman  was  Dr.  Edward  Eggleston,  whose 


Work  for  International  Copyright       91 

service  and  personal  influence  in  Washington  proved 
very  valuable.  The  publishers  were  represented  on  the 
Committee  by  Charles  Scribner  and  W.  W.  Appleton. 
The  labor  of  framing  the  successive  bills  fell  chiefly 
to  the  members  and  to  the  counsel  of  the  Publishers' 
Committee. 

In  1888,  Senator  Chace,  of  Rhode  Island,  reported 
favorably  from  the  Patents  Committee  a  bill  that  had 
been  introduced  by  himself,  and  a  similar  bill  was  re 
ported  from  the  Judiciary  Committee  of  the  House  by 
Patrick  A.  Collins,  of  Massachusetts.  The  Chace  bill, 
with  some  amendment,  passed  the  Senate  on  the  pth  of 
May,  1888,  by  a  vote  of  35  to  10.  It  was  reported 
favorably  by  the  Judiciary  Committee  of  the  House, 
but  no  further  action  could  be  secured. 

The  first  draft  of  the  bill,  which  was  submitted  to 
Senator  Chace  by  the  Joint  Committee  of  the  Authors 
and  Publishers,  provided  that  foreign  books  securing 
American  copyright  must  be  printed  in  the  United 
States,  but  permitted  the  importation  of  cliches  of  the 
type,  or  of  duplicates  of  the  plates  which  had  been 
prepared  for  printing  the  original  editions.  It  was 
contended  that  for  certain  classes  of  books  the  necessity 
of  doing  the  typesetting  twice  instead  of  dividing  this 
cost  between  an  English  and  an  American  edition, 
would  involve  a  wasteful  expense,  the  burden  of  which 
would  have  to  be  shared  between  the  readers,  the 
authors,  and  the  publishers.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
Typographical  Unions  insisted  that  a  provision  for 
American  typesetting  was  essential  for  their  trade 
interests,  and  that  unless  such  a  provision  should  be 
inserted,  they  would  be  under  the  necessity  of  opposing 
the  bill. 

It  was  the  opinion  of  Senator  Chace,  and  of  other 
of  the  Congressional  friends  of  copyright,  that  the 


92  Orville  H.  Platt 

co-operation  of  the  Unions  would  be  very  important, 
while  their  influence  against  the  bill  in  committee  and 
through  their  friends  in  the  House  would  probably  be 
sufficiently  powerful  to  prevent  its  passage,  at  least  in 
the  near  future.  It  was,  therefore,  decided  by  the 
authors  and  publishers  of  the  two  leagues  to  accept 
on  this  point  the  contentions  of  the  typographers  and 
to  utilize  their  co-operation.  The  International  Typo 
graphical  Union  selected  as  its  representative  on  the 
Joint  Campaign  Committee  Mr.  John  L.  Kennedy,  of 
the  Washington  Union,  whose  service  proved  valuable 
in  more  ways  than  one. 

The  advocates  of  honest  dealing  in  literary  affairs, 
at  the  beginning  of  the  new  Republican  administration 
of  1889,  found  their  cause  still  far  from  success,  but 
with  the  sentiment  of  the  public  appreciably  aroused, 
and  with  an  increasingly  intelligent  interest  on  the  part 
of  leaders  in  the  two  Houses. 

President  Harrison  in  his  first  message  laconically 
expressed  the  opinion  that  the  enactment  of  an  inter 
national  copyright  law  would  be  "  eminently  wise  and 
just."  Missionary  work  with  Congress  began  at  once, 
and  the  Copyright  Leagues  set  about  creating  a  senti 
ment  at  the  capital  commensurate  with  the  feeling 
that  had  already  been  created  outside. 

In  the  Senate,  Mr.  Platt  and  Mr.  Hoar,  in  the  House 
Mr.  Lodge,  Mr.  Simonds  of  Connecticut,  Mr.  McKinley 
of  Ohio,  Mr.  Adams  of  Illinois,  Mr.  Breckenridge  of 
Kentucky,  Mr.  Wilson  of  West  Virginia,  and  Mr. 
Butterworth  of  Ohio,  were  strong  advocates,  while 
Speaker  Reed  lent  his  all-powerful  aid.  The  most 
active  opponents  of  the  bill  in  the  Senate  were  Beck 
of  Kentucky,  Daniel  of  Virginia,  George  of  Mississippi, 
and  Regan  of  Texas.  Before  the  close  of  the  year, 


Work  for  International  Copyright        93 

Mr.  Chace  resigned  from  the  Senate,  and  on  his  urgent 
advice  it  was  decided  that  Mr.  Platt,  who  was  then  the 
second  member  of  the  Patents  Committee,  and  oldest 
in  point  of  committee  service,  should  take  charge  of 
the  Copyright  bill.  The  selection  was  most  fortunate. 
The  task  of  the  management  of  such  a  bill  was  difficult 
and  delicate,  calling  for  a  full  measure  of  patience, 
persistency,  sagacity,  and  tact,  familiarity  with  parlia 
mentary  procedure,  sympathetic  acquaintance  with 
the  personalities  and  foibles  of  his  associates,  and  the 
capacity  to  deal  both  with  the  leaders  of  the  Senate  and 
the  managers  of  the  House. 

The  successful  guidance  of  the  bill  to  ultimate  enact 
ment  on  the  very  last  night  of  the  Congress  was  de 
pendent  on  innumerable  incidents,  any  one  of  which, 
bunglingly  handled,  would  have  contained  potential 
disaster,  and  every  one  of  which,  under  skilful  pilotage, 
contributed  to  the  final  triumph.  Mr.  Platt  on  the 
very  first  working  day  of  the  session  introduced  a  bill 
providing  for  international  copyright.  A  little  later 
he  reported  favorably  from  the  Patents  Committee 
another  bill,  differing  only  in  the  correction  of  informal 
ities,  and  at  the  earliest  opportunity  he  asked  the  Sen 
ate  to  consider  this  bill  as  in  committee  of  the  whole. 
But  strategically  he  did  not  think  it  wise  to  press  his 
measure  in  the  Senate  until  it  could  be  ascertained  more 
clearly  as  to  the  sentiment  of  the  House.  So  long  as  he 
could  be  instrumental  in  securing  legislation,  he  was 
indifferent  whether  the  measure  bore  his  name.  In  the 
House,  the  Judiciary  Committee  and  the  Patents  Com 
mittee  each  had  reported  bills.  The  Judiciary  Com 
mittee's  bill  reported  by  Mr.  Adams  first  got  the  ear 
of  the  House  through  a  special  order.  It  was  badly 
amended  and  then  beaten  by  a  vote  of  99  to  125.  This 


94  Orville  H.  Platt 

defeat  served  only  as  a  guide  to  the  friends  of  interna 
tional  copyright  for  future  effort.  A  few  days  later 
Mr.  Simonds  introduced  another  bill  on  the  lines  of  the 
bill  originally  introduced  by  Mr.  Chace  two  years  earlier, 
in  accordance  with  the  programme  of  American  writers, 
typographers,  and  publishers.  This  new  measure,  in 
effect,  was  promptly  reported  from  the  Patents  Com 
mittee  of  which  Mr.  Simonds  was  a  member.  It  was 
not  considered,  however,  during  the  strenuous  days 
of  the  first  session  of  the  Fifty-first  Congress,  and  its 
friends  devoted  the  time  until  the  next  session  should 
meet  in  still  further  arousing  public  sentiment  and 
personally  canvassing  the  members  of  the  House. 
President  Harrison  in  his  annual  message  of  Decem 
ber  i,  1890,  renewed  his  recommendation  "in  favor  of 
legislation  affording  just  copyright  protection  to  foreign 
authors  on  a  footing  of  reciprocal  advantages  for  our 
authors  abroad,"  and  on  the  very  next  day,  the  second 
day  of  the  session,  on  call  of  committees,  Mr.  Simonds, 
on  behalf  of  the  Patents  Committee,  called  up  his  bill. 
In  the  face  of  every  known  device  for  parliamentary 
obstruction  the  bill  was  passed  on  December  3,  1890,  by 
a  vote  of  139  to  95.  As  the  Senate  of  the  Fiftieth  Con 
gress,  nearly  identical  in  membership  with  the  Senate 
of  the  Fifty-first  Congress,  had  passed  substantially  the 
same  measure  two  years  before  by  a  majority  of  over 
three  to  one  (35  to  10)  the  vote  in  the  House  was  hailed 
as  a  virtual  achievement  of  the  reform.  It  proved, 
however,  to  be  only  the  prelude  of  one  of  the  hardest 
contests  in  the  Senate's  history. 

It  was  at  this  point  that  Mr.  Platt  assumed  active 
management  of  the  campaign.  The  Senate  was  en 
gaged  in  one  of  its  historic  struggles,  precipitated  by 
the  Democratic  victory  in  November,  and  the  deter- 


Work  for  International  Copyright        95 

initiation  of  the  Republican  leaders,  if  possible,  to  secure 
the  enactment  of  the  Federal  Elections  law  before  a 
Democratic  House  should  come  into  control.  There 
were  other  important  measures  pressing  for  considera 
tion  which  were  earnestly  desired  by  Senators  on  whom 
the  friends  of  international  copyright  depended  for 
support,  and  the  time  at  the  disposal  of  Congress  be 
fore  the  4th  of  March  was  distressingly  meagre.  To 
secure  even  an  opportunity  to  discuss  a  measure  was 
no  easy  task,  yet  in  face  of  the  eagerness  to  get  at  the 
Pure  Food  bill,  the  Nicaraguan  Canal  bill,  and  the 
Revenue  Cutter  bill,  Mr.  Platt  was  called  upon  not  only 
to  secure  discussion,  but  to  insure  enactment  of  a  bill 
which  was  not  popularly  compelling,  which  was  the 
object  of  bitter  and  mercenary  opposition,  which  was 
objected  to  by  certain  publishers  because  it  deprived 
them  of  discreditable  gain,  and  by  a  great  mass  of  people 
who  had  been  cunningly  convinced  that  international 
copyright  would  mean  an  increase  in  the  price  of  books 
and  would  be  a  blow  at  the  education  of  the  poor.  In 
the  face  of  such  opposition  it  was  manifest  that  in  order 
to  receive  any  consideration  the  bill  must  submit  to 
some  amendment.  The  delicate  task  with  the  Senator 
who  had  it  in  charge  was  to  distinguish  where  it  would 
be  safe  to  yield  without  destroying  altogether,  and 
where  to  remain  steadfast  without  subjecting  the 
measure  to  the  certainty  of  defeat.  A  necessary  first 
step  was  to  insure  consideration  for  the  bill.  Mr. 
Johnson,  secretary  of  the  joint  committee  of  the  various 
organizations  favoring  the  measure,  having  reported 
for  duty,  Mr.  Platt  counselled  him  to  call  upon  the 
members  of  the  Steering  Committee,  on  which  were 
Senators  Hoar  and  Evarts,  and  secure  for  the  bill  as 
high  a  position  as  possible  in  the  regular  order  of 


96  Orville  H.  Platt 

business.  This  was  done,  and  the  copyright  bill  was 
placed  second,  a  labor  bill  having  already  been 
promised  first  place.  This  first  move  of  Senator 
Platt  was  of  the  most  vital  importance. 

On  the  Qth  of  February,  1891,  less  than  a  month 
before  Congress  must  adjourn,  Mr.  Platt,  watching  his 
opportunity,  moved  to  consider  the  House  bill  as  in 
committee  of  the  whole.  Following  his  usual  practice, 
he  trespassed  upon  the  patience  of  the  Senate  only  to 
make  the  briefest  necessary  explanation  of  the  purpose 
of  the  legislation.  The  bill,  he  reminded  them,  was 
practically  the  same  as  the  Chace  bill  which  had  passed 
the  Senate  two  years  earlier,  differing  in  principle  only 
in  that  its  application  was  to  depend  upon  the  adoption 
of  similar  legislation  by  foreign  countries: 

I  will  simply  say  that  the  bill  proceeds  upon  one  broad 
fundamental  principle,  and  that  is,  that  what  a  man  fashions 
by  his  brain,  his  genius,  his  imagination,  or  his  ingenuity, 
is  property  just  as  much  as  what  he  fashions  by  his  hands 
or  acquires  by  manual  or  other  labor,  and  that  being 
property,  it  should  be  property  the  world  over  and  should 
be  recognized  as  such.  If  an  American  writes  a  book,  the 
right  to  publish  that  book  should  be  recognized  as  property 
not  only  in  this  country,  as  it  is  now  under  the  Constitu 
tion,  but  as  property  everywhere.  If  a  citizen  of  another 
country  writes  a  book,  the  right  to  publish  that  book  should 
be  as  much  property  in  this  country  as  in  his  own  country. 

That  is  the  broad  principle  upon  which  this  bill  rests — 
the  protection  of  property,  for  which  governments  are 
instituted.  The  principle  has  been  applied  in  the  case  of 
patents,  and  not  a  little  of  the  growth  and  prosperity  of 
the  country  is  due  to  the  fact  of  the  recognition  by  this 
Government  that  a  foreigner  who  invents  a  new  machine 
or  discovers  a  new  process  shall  be  entitled  to  secure  a 
patent  for  the  same  in  this  country. 


Work  for  International  Copyright        97 

The  Constitution  puts  authors  first  in  saying  that  Con 
gress  may  secure  to  them  exclusive  rights;  it  puts  them 
before  inventors;  but  the  legislation  of  the  country  has 
extended  the  provisions  of  the  Constitution  in  the  matter 
of  inventions  very  much  further  than  it  has  in  the  matter 
of  authorship  and  those  who  come  in  under  the  generic 
term  of  authors. 

I  believe,  myself,  no  measure  before  this  Congress  is  so 
calculated  to  enhance  not  only  the  intellectual  but  the 
material  growth  of  this  country  as  this  Copyright  bill,  and 
I  trust  it  will  pass,  and  pass  without  amendment.  As  I 
said,  we  have  waited  fifty-three  years  for  this  opportunity, 
and  this  opportunity  may  be  wholly  lost  by  amendments 
in  the  Senate. 

I  do  not  know  that  I  would  say  that  this  is  a  perfect  bill, 
but  it  is  a  bill  which  has  had  long  consideration  by  com 
mittees  of  the  Senate  and  of  the  House  of  Representatives. 
It  comes  to  us  from  the  House,  and  now  is  our  opportunity 
to  obtain  the  passage  of  such  a  law.  If  there  is  anything 
in  it  which  needs  further  examination,  which  would  call 
for  further  legislation,  the  way  for  the  people  who  desire 
international  copyright  to  obtain  it  is  to  pass  the  bill  while 
we  have  the  opportunity  to  pass  it,  and  establish  the 
principle.  Then  if  it  needs  further  application,  we  can 
trust  to  the  future  that  justice  will  be  done. 

In  spite  of  his  appeal  for  the  passage  of  the  bill  in 
the  form  in  which  it  came  from  the  House,  Mr.  Platt 
was  obliged  to  yield  to  several  amendments,  which, 
in  the  opinion  of  friends  of  the  bill,  detracted  from  its 
efficacy,  but  which  were  essential  to  securing  its  passage 
through  the  Senate.  For  more  than  a  week,  with 
measures  of  urgent  importance  pressing  upon  the 
Senate,  and  with  the  end  of  Congress  in  sight,  Mr. 
Platt  held  the  Senate  to  the  consideration  of  the  Copy 
right  bill,  arguing,  placating,  urging,  pleading.  He 


98  Orville  H.  Platt 

spoke  as  seldom  as  possible,  but  a  few  things  he  felt 
that  he  must  say.  For  one,  he  could  not  tolerate  the 
lax  notions  prevailing  about  the  rights  of  property: 

People  see  the  acquisition  of  property  in  large  amounts 
and  then  jump  to  the  conclusion  that  some  man  whom  they 
call  a  millionaire  has  not  acquired  his  property  by  direct 
and  honest  methods,  and  the  result  is  that  they  have  no 
respect  for  that  man's  property  any  more  than  they  have 
for  the  gambler's.  But  they  do  not  draw  the  line  between 
property  honestly  acquired  and  property  which  has  been 
acquired  dishonestly.  They  do  not  draw  the  line  between 
property  for  which  a  good  fair  equivalent  has  been  given 
and  property  for  which  an  honest  and  fair  equivalent  has 
not  been  given.  So  there  has  arisen  in  this  country  a 
tendency  which,  if  not  checked,  will  bring  us  to  ruin  sooner 
than  is  generally  supposed — a  sentiment  not  to  regard  the 
rights  of  property  honestly  acquired. 

Of  all  the  property  which  is  the  subject  of  acquisition, 
literary  and  intellectual  and  artistic  property  is  the  most 
honestly  acquired.  A  man  who  has  devoted  his  life  to 
letters,  a  man  who  has  devoted  his  life  to  art,  who  has 
been  its  slave  and  its  devotee,  is  as  honestly  possessed  of 
the  property  which  he  produces  in  that  way  as  any  man 
in  the  United  States  is  honestly  possessed  of  any  property. 

I  wish  to  touch  right  here  on  the  idea  that  a  copyright 
is  a  monopoly.  It  is  not  a  monopoly  in  the-  strict  sense 
or  in  the  legal  sense,  or  in  the  right  sense  of  that  word. 
It  is  rather  a  property  right.  The  right  of  a  man  to  publish 
his  book  and  to  control  the  publication  of  his  book,  to 
publish  his  engraving  and  to  control  the  publication  of  his 
engraving,  to  reproduce  and  control  the  reproduction  of  his 
painting,  is  a  right,  and  a  right  of  property,  just  as,  when 
my  friend  from  Michigan  breeds  a  fine  horse,  that  horse  is 
his  property,  and  no  other  man  can  use  it;  he  has  a  right 
to  control  the  use  of  it. 

It  is  not  in  the  sense  in  which  the  term  is  used  a  monopoly. 


Work  for  International  Copyright        99 

It  is  the  right  to  use  one's  property.  A  man  buys  a  house. 
He  alone  has  the  right  to  use  it.  He  has  a  right  to  say  who 
shall  use  it ;  he  has  a  right  to  rent  it  to  a  tenant,  and  no 
other  man  shall  set  his  foot  in  it;  no  other  man  can  come 
to  it;  it  is  his  castle;  he  may  kill  the  man  who  ruthlessly 
tries  to  enter  it.  And  yet  no  one  calls  him  a  monopolist. 
This  copyright  is  simply  protecting  men  in  their  property 
rights. 

With  the  argument  for  cheap  books  he  was  equally 
out  of  patience.  He  declared  that  no  man  had  a  right 
to  set  up  a  cry  for  cheap  books,  if  insisting  that  they 
must  be  cheaper,  whether  stolen  or  not: 

No  man  has  a  right  to  put  up  the  cry  for  cheap  books 
if  that  cheapness  depends  upon  appropriation  without  con 
sent  of  the  owner,  any  more  than  he  has  for  cheap  horses 
if  to  insure  that  cheapness  the  rights  of  the  owner  are  in 
any  way  to  be  interfered  with  or  limited  or  restricted.  You 
can  have  everything  cheap  if  you  appropriate  it  without 
the  consent  of  the  owner;  there  is  no  trouble  about  that. 
There  is  no  species  of  property  in  the  world  which  you  can 
not  cheapen  by  appropriation.  Sometimes  I  think  that 
the  moral  sense  of  the  community  is  entirely  dulled  on  this 
subject. 

Finally  he  made  his  appeal  for  international  copy 
right  on  broad  and  general  grounds  because  he  believed 
it  was  just  and  beneficial. 

I  believe  this  Congress  cannot  be  engaged  in  any  work 
nobler,  or  grander,  or  more  beneficial,  or  more  calculated 
to  develop  this  nation  than  to  protect  its  literature  and  its 
art,  and  to  so  act  and  to  so  legislate  that  its  literature  and 
its  art  shall  be  protected  wherever  the  sun  shines,  in  other 
countries  as  well  as  in  this  country.  I  believe  by  that 
means  you  will  build  up  a  literature,  a  standard  of  thought, 
a  standard  of  intellectual  effort,  that  you  will  build  up  a 


ioo  Orville  H.  Platt 

standard  of  art  in  this  country,  which  will  elevate  our  whole 
people. 

What  is  this  country  for?  Is  it  for  the  mere  matter  of 
getting  things  cheap  for  the  people?  Is  that  all  there  is 
for  government  in  these  days  to  think  of?  Has  it  come  to 
this,  that  all  the  wheels  of  government  must  be  turned 
to  get  things  cheap  for  the  people  at  the  expense  of  the 
property  and  the  rights  of  others  if  need  be?  Is  not  the 
Government  to  build  up,  is  it  not  to  develop,  is  it  not  to 
make  a  higher  and  nobler  race  of  our  people,  and  how  can 
we  reach  that  any  better  than  by  protecting,  by  stimulating, 
by  encouraging  intellectual  effort  and  artistic  effort? 

I  want  to  tell  Senators  that  the  brain  of  our  people  is 
the  true  and  I  might  say  the  only  source  of  our  national 
wealth.  It  is  what  our  people  think.  When  they  think 
on  a  higher  plane  they  are  the  richer.  The  higher  the 
plane  of  intellectual  development,  and  the  higher  the  plane 
of  artistic  development  the  richer  are  our  people  with  a 
wealth  that  is  not  evanescent,  but  a  wealth  that  endures, 
and  a  wealth  that  endures  not  only  in  this  world,  but  is  the 
only  wealth  that  a  man  can  take  out  of  it. 

Senator  Platt' s  most  serious  embarrassment  came 
from  amendments  offered  by  Frye  and  Sherman.  The 
bill  as  it  passed  the  House  provided  that  the  two  copies 
of  books  required  to  be  deposited  in  the  Library  of 
Congress  for  purposes  of  international  copyright  should 
be  ''printed  from  type  set  within  the  United  States  or 
from  plates  made  therefrom."  Frye  moved  to  include 
in  this  requirement,  maps,  charts,  dramatical  and 
musical  compositions,  engravings,  cuts,  prints,  photo 
graphs,  chromos,  and  lithographs.  Sherman  moved  to 
amend  the  clause  prohibiting  the  importation  of  books 
printed  abroad,  enjoying  the  privilege  of  amended 
copyright,  by  striking  out  the  word  "prohibited'' 
and  inserting  in  lieu  thereof  "subject  to  the  duties 


Work  for  International  Copyright      101 

provided  by  law."  The  Frye  amendment  was  adopted 
by  a  vote  of  27  to  24,  the  Sherman  amendment  by  a 
vote  of  25  to  24.  Either  one  of  these  amendments,  had 
they  not  been  attended  to  in  Conference,  would  have 
seriously  affected  the  chances  of  passing  the  bill,  and  if 
the  Sherman  amendment  had  become  a  law,  it  would 
have  practically  nullified  the  purpose  of  the  legislation. 
Frye's  amendment  was  subsequently  modified  so  as 
to  apply  only  to  lithographs  and  photographs,  and  the 
Sherman  amendment  went  out  altogether. 

At  last,  on  February  i8th,  he  secured  a  vote  on  the 
bill,  and  it  was  passed  by  a  majority  of  36  to  14,  badly 
amended  it  is  true,  but  in  such  form  as  to  give  some 
hope  of  an  adjustment.  A  conference  with  the  House 
was  asked,  and  Mr.  Platt,  Mr.  Hiscock,  and  Mr.  Gray 
were  appointed  conferees  for  the  Senate.  Only  four 
teen  days  remained  before  the  statutory  adjournment 
of  Congress,  and  ten  days  elapsed  before  the  House  took 
the  question  up  and  acceded  to  the  Senate's  request. 
It  is  an  interesting  coincidence  that  the  leading  member 
of  the  Conference  Committee  on  the  part  of  the  House, 
Mr.  Simonds,  should  have  been  a  Connecticut  man,  so 
that  it  fell  to  the  lot  of  two  representatives  of  a  single 
State  to  play  the  most  important  part  in  the  culmina 
tion  of  fifty  years'  endeavor.  It  is  to  be  remembered, 
too,  that  General  Hawley  of  Connecticut  was  the  first 
to  introduce  a  pure  and  simple  copyright  bill  in  1885. 
Even  after  the  bill  had  gone  to  Conference  the  fight 
against  it  was  continued,  and  it  was  then  that  some 
of  the  most  skilful  manoeuvres  were  resorted  to.  On 
March  2d,  the  House  adopted  the  report  of  the  Con 
ference  Committee,  which  eliminated  some  of  the  ob 
jectionable  Senate  amendments,  but  the  Senate  refused 
to  recede.  There  was  a  further  struggle  for  twenty- 


102  Orville  H.  Platt 

four  hours,  one  proposition  for  compromise  after  another 
being  made,  and  finally  after  midnight  on  the  3d  of 
March,  the  Senate  accepted  the  Conference  report  and 
about  2  A.M.  passed  the  bill.  Having  been  signed  by 
the  Vice-President,  the  bill  was  taken  by  Mr.  Lodge 
to  the  House  for  consideration.  After  its  passage  in 
the  House  (at  about  3  A.M.)  and  the  signature  by  the 
Speaker,  the  bill  was  hurriedly  engrossed  (under  the 
immediate  supervision  of  Mr.  Lodge,  who  stood  over  the 
clerks  until  they  had  finished  their  work)  in  order  that 
it  might  be  sent  to  the  President  at  the  White  House. 
According  to  the  usual  routine,  this  would  have  been  the 
end  of  the  matter,  but  the  opponents  of  international 
copyright  were  not  yet  prepared  to  give  up  the  fight. 
Before  the  Senate  had  received  information  of  the 
passage  of  the  bill  by  the  House,  Senator  Pasco  moved 
to  reconsider,  and  when  the  Senate  adjourned  at  4  A.M. 
that  motion  was  pending.  The  Senate  re-assembled 
some  hours  later,  and  about  n  A.  M.,  March  4th,  voted 
down  Senator  Pasco' s  motion,  and  the  President,  being 
then  at  the  Capitol,  signed  the  bill. 

In  the  history  of  legislation,  there  have  been  few 
measures  which  clutched  success  so  narrowly  from  the 
hands  of  opportunity. 

At  the  moment  Mr.  Platt  received  the  full  measure  of 
appreciation  for  the  work  he  had  so  faithfully  performed ; 
he  was  a  guest  of  honor  at  a  banquet  given  in  New  York 
on  April  i3th,  to  celebrate  the  abolition  of  literary 
piracy,1  and  his  services  were  recognized  in  other  ways. 

»  At  this  dinner,  which  was  presided  over  by  E.G.  Stedman,  and 
at  which  were  present  George  William  Curtis,  Henry  Cabot  Lodge, 
and  Count  Emile  de  Keratry,  Robert  Underwood  Johnson  in  the 
course  of  a  response  to  a  toast  said: 

' '  I  could  name  a  dozen  men  at  this  board  and  a  dozen  elsewhere, 
but  for  the  aid  of  any  one  of  whom  at  some  critical  time  we  should 


Work  for  International  Copyright      103 

The  leaders  of  the  movement  were  generous  in  their 
acknowledgment.  The  decoration  of  the  French  Legion 
of  Honor  which  was  conferred  upon  Messrs.  Adams 
and  Simonds,  who  retired  from  the  House  of  Represen 
tatives  on  the  day  the  bill  was  passed,  was  offered  to 
him  but  could  not  be  accepted  because  he  was  still  in 
office ;  but  the  Cercle  de  la  Librairie  and  the  Syndicat 
de  la  Propriete  Litteraire  et  Artistique  of  Paris  sent  to 
him  by  special  messenger  a  gold  medal  struck  in  recog 
nition  of  his  services  to  the  cause  of  literature.  The 
medal  was  brought  to  this  country  by  Count  E.  de 
Keratry  in  June,  1891,  who  delivered  also  a  letter,  of 
which  the  following  is  a  translation: 

PARIS,  June  16,  1891. 
Senator  PLATT  of  Connecticut. 

Washington. 
Senator: 

You  have  decided  by  your  influence  the  vote  of  the 
American  Senate  upon  copyright  in  international  relations. 
You  have  affirmed  "that  a  product  of  a  man's  brain  is  his 
property";  you  have  caused  it  to  be  recognized  "that  there 
can  no  longer  be  any  difference  between  an  American  and  a 

not  have  had  the  happy  fortune  that  brings  us  here  to-night.  There 
was  at  least  one  time,  however,  when  the  identification  of  one  man 
with  the  success  or  failure  of  this  movement  was  complete,  when 
in  fact  its  fortune  appeared  to  rest  wholly  and  for  many  days  upon 
the  tact  and  devotion  of  one  Senator.  I  can  think  of  no  parallel 
to  the  situation  save  the  anecdote  of  Col.  Jones's  body  servant 
in  St.  Mary's  Parish  in  Louisiana.  A  visitor  conveyed  through 
the  bayous  of  the  Teche  inquired  of  his  darkey  boatman,  Wesley, 
whether  his  former  master  was  connected  with  the  White  League. 
'"Gunnel  Jones  connect  wid  de  White  League?'  queried  Wesley 
in  unaffected  astonishment.  'Yes,  a  member  of  the  League.' 
'Gunnel  Jones  a  member  ob  de  White  League?  Gunnel  Jones? 
Why,  bress  de  Lord,  Massa,  Gunnel  Jones  am  de  White  League.' 
In  those  last  despairing  days  in  the  Senate,  Senator  Platt  was  not 
merely  in  charge  of  the  Copyright  bill,  he  was  the  copyright  cause.  " 


io4  Orville  H.  Platt 

foreign  author  and  that  the  latter  henceforth  ought  to  be 
placed,  with  you,  on  the  same  footing  with  the  native 
author."  You  have  said  with  regard  to  France  that  the 
hour  has  long  since  come  to  grant  reciprocity  for  her  decree 
of  1852,  which  declared  all  piracy  of  a  foreign  work,  a  crime. 
It  is  our  duty  to  express  our  keen  gratitude  for  the 
great  part  you  have  taken  "in  this  triumph  of  a  just  cause." 
Our  Cercle  de  la  Librairie  and  Syndicat  des  Associations 
Protectrices  des  (Euvres  de  1'Esprit  et  de  1'Art  have  had 
made  in  your  name  a  medal  to  bear  witness  to  this  legiti 
mate  sentiment,  and  we  are  happy  to  have  been  commis 
sioned  to  transmit  it  to  you. 

Will  the  Senator  accept  the  expression  of  our  high  regard. 
(The  President  of  the  Cercle  de  la  Librairie 
and  the  Syndicat  de  la  Proprie'te' 
Litt£raire  et  Artistique.) 

(Signed)  A.  TEMPLIER. 

(The  Secretary  General  of  the  Syndicat.) 
(Signed)  GERMOND  DE  LAVIGNE. 

To  Robert  Underwood  Johnson,  Secretary  of  the 
American  (Authors')  Copyright  League,  who  had 
written  him  an  expression  of  thanks,  he  replied  a  few 
days  after  the  adjournment  of  Congress: 

The  fact  that  I  am  still  fighting  over  again  night  by 
night,  in  my  sleep,  the  copyright  struggle,  will  show  you  how 
deeply  it  took  hold  of  me,  and  how  nearly  it  came  to  up 
setting  me.  I  have  a  feeling  that  I  was  not  very  courteous 
to  its  friends  while  the  contest  was  in  progress,  so  morose 
and  irritable,  all  of  which  I  know  they  will  forgive  me  for. 
I  am  very  glad  that  it  resulted  in  success.  As  I  have 
written  some  of  the  publishers,  the  fate  of  copyright  is  now 
in  their  hands.  The  sentiment  that  it  was  a  bill  for  the 
benefit  of  the  publishers  and  against  the  interests  of  the 
people  took  a  much  deeper  root  than  we  at  the  time  realized, 
although  we  felt  its  strength  in  a  measure.  But  in  talking 


Work  for  International  Copyright      105 

with  people  since  the  close  of  Congress  I  am  surprised  to 
see  how  thoroughly  and  completely  that  idea  has  per 
meated  the  country.  There  is  no  way  of  meeting  it  except 
by  publishing  editions  of  books  copyrighted  by  foreign 
authors  at  a  low  figure.  The  publishers  ought  to  see  this, 
and  ought  to  make  a  point  of  it.  A  twenty-five  cent  edi 
tion  of  a  popular  foreign  author's  copyrighted  book,  fairly 
executed,  scattered  as  far  as  the  market  can  be  reached, 
with  attention  called  to  it  in  the  public  press  as  being  one 
of  the  first  results  of  the  copyright  law,  will  do  more  for 
copyright  than  anything  else.  I  don't  believe  that  you, 
living  in  a  publisher's  atmosphere,  can  realize  fully  the 
force  of  this,  but  you  can  to  some  extent. 

To  Dana  Estes,  the  Boston  publisher,  he  wrote : 

I  confess  that  there  were  times  when  the  passage  of 
the  Copyright  bill  seemed  hopeless,  and  I  do  think  that 
persistent  and  patient  work  had  something  to  do  with  the 
final  result,  over  which  I  think  I  was  as  much  gratified 
as  any  of  the  persons  interested  in  the  passage  of  the  bill. 
Indeed,  it  is  either  my  misfortune  or  good  fortune  always 
to  feel  more  keenly  than  those  directly  concerned,  an 
interest  in  whatever  I  undertake.  It  is  wearing  work 
under  such  circumstances,  and  sometimes  I  got  irritable 
and  cross,  and  as  I  look  back  over  this  contest,  I  feel  as  if 
I  had  not  always  been  patient  and  courteous  to  those  who 
were  here  looking  after  it,  so  perhaps  you  have  a  better 
opinion  of  me  for  having  stayed  away. 

I  think  copyright  has  come  to  stay,  unless  publishers 
put  up  the  price  of  books  or  make  some  combination  which 
will  be  stigmatized  as  a  trust.  I  don't  believe  they  intend 
to  do  this  or  that  it  would  be  for  their  advantage  to  do  it, 
and  I  trust  you  may  steer  clear  of  it.  The  publisher  who 
first  gets  control  of  the  work  of  a  popular  English  author 
and  publishes  a  cheap  edition  of  it,  and  forces  a  wide  cir 
culation,  will  do  more  for  the  copyright  law  than  we  have 
been  able  to  do  in  passing  it.  The  objection  which  made 


io6  Orville  H.  Platt 

votes  against  it  was  the  cry  of  monopoly  and  dearer  books. 
The  publishers  can  silence  that  cry,  and  it  is  very  important 
that  they  should  do  so  if  possible,  before  the  next  session 
of  Congress.  I  need  not  say  to  you  that  the  spirit  of  social 
ism  is  rampant  in  the  country,  and  the  regard  for  property 
rights  of  all  kinds  is  being  weakened  by  demagogues  and 
by  great  masses  of  people  who  want  to  get  something  that 
does  n't  belong  to  them,  and  the  right  of  property  in  the  book 
or  other  creation  of  man's  intellect  or  genius  is  harder  to 
understand  and  appreciate,  and  therefore  less  likely  to  be 
respected  than  the  property  right  to  real  estate  or  to 
other  kinds  of  personal  property.  It  is  right  along  this 
line  that  the  danger  lies.  It  will  not  do  to  aggravate  this 
sentiment  in  respect  to  copyright.  I  want  to  see  some 
publisher  try  the  experiment  of  publishing  the  copyright 
work  of  a  foreign  author  for  the  million. 

Great  as  were  his  services  to  the  cause  of  international 
copyright  in  1891,  they  did  not  by  any  means  mark 
the  extent  of  his  achievements.  Throughout  his  life 
he  remained  the  steadfast  friend  of  those  who  were 
interested  in  improving  the  copyright  laws,  and  they 
invariably  turned  to  him  in  the  hour  of  need.  The 
law  of  March  4,  1891  was  far  from  adequate,  but  it 
was  the  establishment  of  the  principle  for  which  the 
authors  of  the  English-speaking  world  had  been  striv 
ing.  It  proved  possible  by  means  of  the  reciprocity 
provisions  in  the  statute  to  bring  the  United  States 
into  copyright  relations  with  all  important  European 
countries. 

In  1897,  when  the  playwrights  of  America  planned 
to  secure  the  enactment  of  an  improved  law  for  the 
protection  of  dramatic  copyrights  they  turned  instinc 
tively  to  Mr.  Platt,  and  in  the  Fifty-fourth  Congress, 
largely  through  his  efforts,  a  bill  was  enacted  which 
elicited  from  Bronson  Howard,  the  President  of  the 


Work  for  International  Copyright      107 

American  Dramatists  Club,  the  following  appreciative 
letter: 

201  WEST  78xH  STREET,  NEW  YORK, 

January  n,  1897. 
Honorable  O.  H.  PLATT, 

United  States  Senate. 
DEAR  SIR: 

I  beg  to  thank  you  most  earnestly  on  behalf  of  the  Amer 
ican  Dramatists  Club  for  the  great  interest  you  have 
taken,  with  other  members  of  the  committee  of  which  you 
are  chairman,  in  the  passage  of  the  new  law,  giving  pro 
tection  to  dramatic  writers  and  to  managers  in  America. 
The  importance  of  the  new  act  reaches  beyond  even  the 
justice  it  extends  to  your  fellow  American  citizens.  It  will 
raise  the  standard  of  the  American  theatre  in  every  re 
spect,  and  so  .work  a  great  public  good.  Especially  it  will 
tend  strongly  and  with  certainty  to  the  development  of  a 
national  dramatic  literature  worthy  of  the  country;  some 
thing  impossible  to  establish  under  the  old  law. 

In  due  season,  the  defects  which  were  inevitable  in 
the  law  of  1891  began  to  assert  themselves.  Complaints 
arose  from  authors  of  Germany,  France,  Italy,  and  other 
European  states,  against  provisions  of  the  law,  which, 
in  effect,  discriminated  against  all  writers  whose  works 
originated  in  any  other  language  than  English.  In  the 
Fifty-eighth  Congress,  although  no  longer  a  member 
of  the  Patents  Committee,  at  the  request  of  George 
Haven  Putnam,  Secretary  of  the  American  Pub 
lishers'  Copyright  League,  he  introduced  a  bill, 
which  had  been  drafted  under  the  instructions  of 
the  Executive  Committee  of  the  League,  to  remedy 
this  injustice,  which  threatened  to  lead  to  the  abrogation 
of  the  international  copyright  arrangements  between 
Germany  and  France  and  the  United  States.  The 


io8  Orville  H.  Platt 

purpose  of  the  bill  was  to  relieve  the  foreign  author 
in  the  difficulty  he  experienced  in  complying  with  the 
typesetting  clause,  by  reason  of  the  fact  that  his  book 
was  in  a  foreign  language.  The  act  gave  him  com 
plete  copyright  for  one  year,  including  the  absolute 
right  of  translation,  but  in  order  to  continue  the  term 
of  protection  beyond  the  year,  he  was  obliged  to  typeset 
his  work  in  the  original  language  in  the  United  States,  or 
to  typeset  a  translation  of  it,  in  which  case  he  was 
protected  both  in  the  translation  and  in  the  original 
work.  If  he  complied  with  the  typesetting  clause  as  to 
the  original  work  he  secured  the  absolute  right  of  trans 
lation  for  the  entire  term  of  the  copyright. 

It  was  no  light  task  to  secure  the  enactment  of  any 
kind  of  copyright  legislation,  and  on  a  smaller  scale 
this  measure  underwent  some  of  the  vicissitudes  which 
beset  the  original  bill  in  the  Fifty-first  Congress,  but 
finally  during  the  last  week  of  the  Congress,  it  became  a 
law,  thus  proving  to  be  almost  the  last  public  act  of 
Mr.  Platt's  life.  On  March  3,  1905,  he  received  from 
George  Haven  Putnam,  Secretary  of  the  American 
Publishers'  Copyright  League,  this  letter: 

DEAR  MR.  SENATOR: 

I  desire  to  extend,  on  behalf  of  the  Publishers'  Copyright 
League  and  of  others  on  both  sides  of  the  Atlantic,  authors 
and  publishers,  who  are  interested  in  the  protection  of 
literary  property,  our  cordial  and  appreciative  thanks  for 
the  patient,  capable,  and  all  effective  service  that  has  been 
rendered  by  the  Senior  Senator  from  Connecticut  during  the 
past  three  years  in  connection  with  the  measure  that  has 
now  secured  enactment  in  Congress.  I  have  this  morning 
a  report  from  the  President  that  the  bill  shall  receive  his 
signature.  Your  friendly  co-operation  in  this  particular 
undertaking  is  in  line  with  a  long  series  of  similar  services 


Work  for  International  Copyright      109 

that  you  have  been  able  to  render  to  the  cause  of  literary 
property  and  of  national  ethics. 

Mr.  Putnam  was  able  later  to  report  to  Mr.  Platt 
that  if  the  serious  injustice  of  which  the  Continental 
authors  and  their  representatives  had  complained  had 
not  been  remedied  by  the  amendment  in  question,  the 
copyright  convention  between  Germany  and  the  United 
States  would  probably  have  been  terminated.  The  first 
steps  towards  such  cancellation  of  the  convention  had, 
in  fact,  at  the  instance  of  the  German  Copyright  League, 
already  been  taken  in  the  Reichstag. 

That  the  world  of  letters  gratefully  remembered  the 
service  he  had  done  the  cause  of  literature  was  shown 
only  a  few  weeks  later,  when  the  word  passed  over  the 
wires  that  the  end  had  come.  Among  the  messages 
received  at  the  house  of  mourning  in  Judea,  was  this : 

The  American  Copyright  League  respectfully  offers  you 
its  sympathy.  Your  honored  husband  was  the  father  of 
international  copyright,  and  deserves  to  be  gratefully  re 
membered  by  all  lovers  of  justice  and  of  letters.  This 
organization  will  be  represented  on  Tuesday. 

EDMUND  CLARENCE  STEDMAN, 

President, 
ROBERT  UNDERWOOD  JOHNSON, 

Secretary. 

Resolutions  were  also  adopted  by  the  American 
Publishers'  Copyright  League,  as  follows: 

The  Executive  Committee  of  the  American  Publishers' 
Copyright  League  feels  that  in  the  death  of  the  Honorable 
Orville  H.  Platt,  of  Connecticut,  the  friends  of  copyright 
have  lost  one  of  their  most  efficient  and  steadfast  support 
ers,  and  one  upon  whose  judgment  and  experience  they 
could  always  rely. 


no  Orville  H.  Platt 

The  passage  of  the  International  Copyright  act  of  1891 
was  chiefly  due  to  Senator  Platt,  and  his  interest  in  the 
cause  of  copyright  continued  until  his  death. 

The  Executive  Committee  records  upon  its  minutes  the 
gratitude  of  the  American  Publishers'  Copyright  League 
to  Senator  Platt,  and  its  appreciation  of  his  great  ability 
as  a  statesman,  his  high  sense  of  public  duty,  and  will  never 
forget  the  kindness  and  consideration  he  has  always 
shown  to  all  members  of  the  League.  The  President  is 
directed  to  send  a  copy  of  this  resolution  to  the  family  of 
Senator  Platt,  and  to  offer  them  the  sincere  sympathy  of 
the  League. 

W.  W.  APPLETON,  President. 
GEO.  HAVEN  PUTNAM,  Secretary. 

A  few  days  after  Mr.  Platt 's  death,  the  following 
appreciative  letter  from  the  pen  of  Robert  Underwood 
Johnson,  Secretary  of  the  American  (Authors')  Copy 
right  League,  appeared  in  the  New  York  Evening  Post: 

Senator  0.  H.  Platt  and  International  Copyright 

To  THE  EDITOR  OF  THE  "  EVENING  POST  ": 

SIR:  In  the  press  notices  of  the  death  of  Senator  Orville 
H.  Platt  I  find  in  the  enumeration  of  his  public  services 
little  or,  in  some  cases,  no  mention  of  his  activity  in  the 
campaign  for  the  International  Copyright  bill  of  1891. 

No  one  who  knows  the  facts  will  dispute  the  statement 
that  the  passage  of  the  bill  was  due  first  of  all  to  Senator 
Platt.  His  high  character,  his  mastery  of  the  subject,  his 
good  humor,  his  tact,  and  his  parliamentary  experience 
brought  the  bill  through  the  numerous  vicissitudes  which 
beset  it  in  the  last  eight  weeks  of  the  session.  It  was 
inspiriting  to  note  his  undemonstrative  but  unwearying 
devotion — rallying  the  friends  of  the  bill  again  and  again, 
gently  mollifying  the  opposition  of  many  enemies,  exhorting 
to  patience  supporters  whose  favored  measure  was  being 


Work  for  International  Copyright      m 

blocked  by  the  bill,  and  who  as  the  session  drew  to  a  close 
were  threatening  to  side-track  it  if  it  did  not  get  out  of  their 
way.  Our  era  of  literary  piracy  was  memorable  for  the 
many  statesmen  who  were  enlisted  in  the  defence  of  literary 
property,  but  the  one  man  more  than  any  other  who  ac 
complished  the  reform  was  Orville  H.  Platt. 

In  view  of  the  fact  that  in  the  press  reports  of  the  obsequies 
of  Senator  Platt  no  mention  has  been  made  of  the  participa 
tion  of  authors  or  publishers,  I  may  be  pardoned  for  saying 
that  since  his  death  the  two  copyright  leagues  have  done 
what  they  could  to  honor  his  memory  by  recognizing  his 
extraordinary  services  to  the  cause  of  justice  to  literary 
property.  Both  the  American  Publishers'  Copyright 
League  and  the  American  (Authors')  Copyright  League 
sent  to  Mrs.  Platt  telegrams  of  sympathy  and  of  grateful 
acknowledgment,  and  both  were  officially  represented  at  the 
funeral — the  former  by  its  President,  Mr.  William  W.  Ap- 
pleton,  and,  in  the  absence  in  Europe  of  'its  Secretary,  Mr. 
Putnam,  by  Mr.  Frank  H.  Dodd  of  the  Executive  Committee ; 
the  latter  by  its  Secretary.  It  was  a  matter  of  great  regret 
to  Mr.  Stedman,  the  President,  that  it  was  impossible  for 
him  to  attend.  The  Executive  Council  of  the  Authors' 
League  also  sent  a  wreath. 

I  beg  the  space  for  these  facts  lest  it  might  be  thought 
that  those  who  know  Senator  Platt's  pre-eminent  service 
were  singularly  indifferent  to  his  death. 

It  is  said  that  republics  are  ungrateful.  This  ought,  least 
of  all,  to  be  true  of  the  republic  of  letters. 

R.  U.  JOHNSON, 
Secretary  American   Copyright   League. 

NEW  YORK,  April  26th. 

On  the  personal  side  of  Mr;  Platt's  work  in  behalf  of 
American  publishers  and  authors  during  this  period, 
Mr.  George  Haven  Putnam  writes: 

It  was  my  good  fortune,  in  connection  with  my  work  on 
behalf  of  literary  property,  to  come  into  personal  relations 


ii2  Orville  H.  Platt 

in  Washington  and  in  New  York  with  Senator  Platt, 
relations  which  covered  a  long  series  of  years.  I  found 
myself  holding  the  Senator  in  increasing  regard  not  only 
for  clear-headed  and  wise-minded  statesmanship,  but  for 
his  absolute  integrity  of  purpose,  freedom  from  self- 
seeking,  and  general  sweetness  of  nature.  It  was  this 
combination  of  sweetness  and  force  in  his  character,  com 
bined,  of  course,  during  the  later  years  of  his  work  in 
Washington,  with  his  wide  experience  in  affairs  and  know 
ledge  of  men,  that  secured  for  him  so  exceptional  an  in 
fluence  over  the  opinions  and  the  actions  of  his  associates. 
He  was  held  in  affectionate  regard  not  only  by  those  with 
whom  he  was  in  accord  on  the  political  issues  of  the  day, 
but  by  practically  all  of  his  political  opponents,  that  is  to 
say,  by  all  with  whom  he  came  into  any  personal  relations. 
The  responsibility  came  upon  him  during  the  years  between 
1884  and  1891  of  presenting  before  successive  committees 
of  the  House  and  of  the  Senate  the  arguments  in  behalf  of 
international  copyright,  arguments  which  were,  as  it  was 
claimed,  simply  a  contention  on  behalf  not  only  of  national 
ethics  but  of  the  highest  intellectual  interests  of  the  com 
munity.  In  addition  to  the  formal  arguments  presented  in 
the  committee  rooms,  there  was,  of  course,  much  to  be 
done  in  the  matter  of  personal  words  with  senators  and 
representatives,  to  many  of  whom  the  subject  was  entirely 
unfamiliar.  It  was  in  this  matter  of  personal  relation  and 
in  the  task  of  withstanding  prejudices  that  were  mainly 
based  upon  ignorance  of  the  subject,  that  Senator  Platt 's 
influence  and  service  were  of  inestimable  value. 

I  recall  one  occasion,  in  1904,  when  the  Committee  on 
Patents,  of  which  the  Senator  had  for  years  been  Chairman, 
had,  in  giving  their  approval  to  a  provision  for  a  fuller 
measure  of  protection  for  works  originating  on  the  Conti 
nent,  through  a  clerical  error,  connected  with  this  amend 
ment  certain  provisions  taken  from  the  statute  book  of  1 89 1 . 
The  result  of  this  action  would  have  been  a  recommendation 
on  the  part  of  the  Committee  on  Patents  for  rescinding  the 


Work  for  International  Copyright      113 

international  copyright  that  had  been  secured  in  1891.  I 
was  permitted  to  accompany  Senator  Platt  to  a  meeting 
of  the  Committee,  of  which  at  that  time  Senator  McComas, 
of  Maryland,  was  Chairman.  To  Senator  McComas  the 
subject  of  copyright  was  comparatively  new,  and  he  had  not 
had  direct  touch  with  the  previous  proceedings.  Senator 
Platt  began  to  explain  to  the  Committee  the  error  that  had 
been  made  in  its  previous  action.  He  was  interrupted 
by  the  Chairman  and  by  one  or  two  members:  "There  is 
no  necessity  for  any  detailed  explanation,  Senator;  if  you 
say  the  action  was  wrong,  it  will,  of  course,  be  rescinded. 
Tell  us  what  you  want,  and  you  shall  have  our  approval." 
Each  man  in  the  room  knew  not  only  that  Senator  Platt 
understood  the  subject  of  copyright,  but  that  any  word 
that  he  had  to  give  on  this  or  on  any  other  matter  could 
be  absolutely  trusted.  The  people  are  fortunate  when 
their  legislative  business  can  be  in  the  hands  of  men  like 
Orville  H.  Platt  who  are  not  only  capable  leaders  but  also 
great  citizens.  The  standard  set  by  him  for  the  conduct  of 
the  nation's  business  will  prove  of  inestimable  service  for 
legislators,  and  for  the  nation  back  of  the  legislators,  for 
the  years  to  come. 

8 


CHAPTER  IX 

PROTECTOR  OF  THE  INDIAN 

The  Red  Man's  Most  Practical  and  Useful  Friend — Fourteen  Years 

with  the  Committee  on  Indian  Affairs — Prevents 

Mischievous  Legislation. 

IT  was  almost  a  matter  of  chance  that  so  much  of  the 
Connecticut  Senator's  activity  in  public  life  should 
have  been  turned  to  a  question  which  up  to  the  time  of  his 
arrival  in  Washington  had  hardly  engaged  his  thoughts 
and  which  would  seem  to  have  as  little  interest  for  his 
immediate  constituency  as  any  in  the  numerous  group 
of  governmental  problems.  After  he  had  been  eight 
years  a  Senator,  he  found  himself  a  member  of  the 
Committee  on  Indian  Affairs,  an  assignment  which  few 
sought,  and  for  which  he  had  no  special  inclination. 
The  Chairman  of  the  Committee  was  Henry  L.  Dawes 
of  Massachusetts,  a  serious-minded  and  industrious 
man,  who,  after  distinguished  service  in  the  House 
as  Chairman  of  the  Ways  and  Means  Committee,  had 
found  his  peculiar  sphere  of  usefulness  in  the  Senate 
to  be  the  conscientious  guardianship  of  the  interests 
of  the  nation's  wards.  It  was  probably  at  his  request 
that  Mr.  Platt,  who  by  that  time  was  known  as  a  pains 
taking  and  unbeguilable  Senator,  became  a  member. 
It  is  a  curious  circumstance  that  for  many  years  the 
fortunes  of  the  Indian  should  have  been  so  largely 
in  the  keeping  of  two  Senators  who  were  almost  neigh 
bors  in  the  Berkshire  and  Litchfield  hills,  and  it  was 

114 


Protector  of  the  Indian  115 

a  lucky  chance  that  two  high-minded  men  of  such 
capacity  should  have  been  ready  to  devote  their  time 
and  talents  to  a  thankless  task. 

Except  to  a  limited  number  of  Senators,  most  of  them 
from  far  western  States,  matters  concerning  the  Indians 
were  of  only  casual  interest,  unless,  through  neglect  and 
indifference,  something  in  the  nature  of  a  scandal 
developed,  as  was  not  infrequently  the  case;  yet  the 
questions  growing  out  of  the  relations  of  the  United 
States  with  its  Indian  wards,  especially  the  five  civilized 
tribes  in  the  Indian  Territory,  were  for  many  years 
among  the  most  complicated  and  difficult  problems 
with  which  Congress  had  to  deal.  The  treaties  and 
agreements  with  the  Indian  tribes,  some  of  them  dating 
back  nearly  a  century,  were  continually  calling  for  the 
best  legal  ability  in  their  interpretation  and  application 
to  constantly  arising  questions  of  administration.  The 
never-ending  conflict  between  the  friends  of  the  Indian 
and  the  white  settlers  and  avaricious  corporations 
encroaching  on  the  reservation  forced  tangled  problems 
upon  the  legislative  branch  of  the  Government.  The 
opulent  soil  of  the  territory  occupied  by  the  Indians 
has  always  been  a  lure  to  the  white  man,  inciting  him 
to  violence,  bribery,  and  theft;  while  the  extraordinary 
spectacle  of  nations  within  a  nation,  presented  by  the 
republics  of  the  Indian  Territory  for  many  years, 
afforded  limitless  opportunity  not  only  to  evil-minded 
persons,  but  also  to  the  conscientious  legislator.  It 
was  Mr.  Platt's  difficult  task  for  nearly  twenty  years 
to  stand  between  the  despoilers  of  the  Indian  on  the 
one  hand,  and  his  super-serviceable  friends  on  the  other, 
— to  thwart  the  schemes  of  grafters  and  thieves,  while 
tempering  the  zeal  of  importunate  reformers.  It  was  a 
burden  from  which  he  often  sought  relief,  but  never 


n6  Orville  H.  Platt 

successfully  until  a  few  months  before  he  died,  when  he 
was  able  to  plead  his  assignment  to  the  Chairmanship 
of  the  Judiciary  Committee  as  an  excuse  from  further 
service.  So  he  plodded  along,  examining  with  religious 
scrutiny  every  piece  of  proposed  legislation  and  the 
wearisome  details  of  every  appropriation  bill.  He  was 
scrupulously  accurate  in  his  knowledge  of  the  ramifica 
tions  of  the  Indian  question,  knew  every  provision  of 
every  treaty  and  agreement,  and  all  the  circumstances 
relating  to  every  reservation. 

After  Mr.  Dawes's  retirement  from  the  Senate  in 
1893,  Platt  was,  by  common  consent,  regarded  as  the 
one  man  on  the  Committee  to  whom  other  Senators  must 
look  for  guidance  in  Indian  legislation,  and  the  one  upon 
whom  other  leaders  depended  to  see  that  no  improper 
measures  were  enacted. 

James  K.  Jones  of  Arkansas  became  Chairman  under 
the  Democratic  regime  of  the  Fifty-third  Congress  in 
1893,  but  when  the  Republicans  returned  to  control, 
there  was  an  insistent  demand  that  the  Chairmanship 
of  the  Committee  should  go  to  Mr.  Platt.  He  received 
letters  from  bishops,  college  presidents,  and  friends  of 
the  Indian  everywhere,  urging  him  to  take  the  Chair 
manship,  to  which  he  was  in  line  of  succession.  Mr. 
Dawes,  then  Chairman  of  the  Dawes  Commission,  wrote 
him: 

When  I  was  at  Mohonk  there  was  a  great  deal  of  talk 
about  your  taking  the  Chairmanship  of  Indian  Affairs, 
and  the  cry  was  universal  that  you  must  take  it.  I  told 
them  the  reasons  of  your  reluctance,  which  I  thought  I 
knew  pretty  well.  But  the  friends  of  the  Indian  the 
country  over  know  the  situation,  and  will  sorely  grieve 
if  you  disappoint  them.  Now  I  do  not  know  that  you  owe 
them  anything,  but  I  want  earnestly  to  commend  to  your 


Protector  of  the  Indian  117 

consideration  the  question  whether  you  are  not  called 
upon  to  make  the  sacrifice,  both  for  the  good  name  of  the 
Republican  party,  and  for  the  good  of  the  Indian.  You 
know  what  I  mean.  There  is  no  need  of  further  word 
between  you  and  me,  or  to  induce  you  to  do  what  you 
think  is  right. 

He  was  not  moved  by  these  appeals,  and  chose 
instead  the  Chairmanship  of  the  Committee  on  Patents, 
which  was  much  more  to  his  liking,  and  which  would 
not  be  so  great  a  drain  upon  his  energies  at  a  time  when 
he  was  to  be  occupied  in  the  work  of  the  Committees 
on  Judiciary  and  Finance. 

Into  the  details  of  his  work  on  the  Indian  Affairs 
Committee,  it  is  hardly  profitable  to  go.  Important 
though  it  was,  it  cuts  little  figure  in  the  significant 
history  of  the  time,  and  is  of  interest  now  chiefly  as  an 
illustration  of  the  conscientious  treatment  of  a  strangely 
difficult  and  evanescent  problem.  He  took  an  im 
portant  part  in  all  legislation  affecting  the  Indians  for 
nearly  twenty  years.  His  judgment  prevailed  with  his 
associates  in  innumerable  complicated  questions  which 
the  great  majority  of  Senators  had  neither  time  nor  in 
clination  to  study.  He  had  a  part  in  the  legislation  relat 
ing  to  the  opening  of  the'  *  Cherokee  Outlet "  in  1893,  and 
the  withdrawal  of  government  aid  to  sectarian  schools. 
He  urged,  so  far  as  practicable,  the  allotment  of  lands 
among  the  Indians,  but  he  believed  that  the  Indian 
ought  to  work  his  land  and  not  rent  it  or  sell  it,  as  many 
were  inclined  to  do,  with  the  idea  of  living  in  idleness 
upon  the  proceeds.  The  manner  in  which  his  work 
impressed  his  associates  is  shown  in  the  words  spoken 
after  his  death  by  Mr.  Nelson  of  Minnesota,  a  sagacious 
Senator,  who  had  unusual  opportunities  for  appraising 
it: 


n8  Orville  H.  Platt 

For  sixteen  years  he  was  a  member  of  the  Committee  on 
Indian  Affairs,  where  he  rendered  most  valuable  and  efficient 
service.  No  one  was  better  versed  than  he  in  all  the  intrica 
cies  of  Indian  legislation,  and  no  one  was  more  alive  than 
he  to  the  true  welfare  of  the  Indians — always  on  guard  to 
protect  and  defend  them  against  open  and  insidious  inroads 
on  their  rights  and  interests,  but  never  a  block  or  impedi 
ment  to  the  opening  and  settlement  of  our  vast  public 
domain.  His  heart  went  out  to  the  frontiersman,  as  well 
as  to  the  Indians.  He  had  none  of  those  hazy  and  tran 
scendent  notions  of  so-called  "Indian  rights"  or  "Indian 
character"  possessed  by  a  school  of  closet  reformers.  He 
gauged  the  Indian  at  his  true  worth  and  at  his  real  aptitude 
and  ability,  and  hence  he  was  the  most  practical  and  useful 
friend  the  Indian  had. 

One  of  the  first  measures  which  came  out  of  the 
Indian  Committee  after  he  became  a  member  did  not 
meet  with  his  approval.  It  was  a  bill  "  For  the  relief 
and  civilization  of  the  Chippewa  Indians  in  the  State 
of  Minnesota  " — briefly,  a  proposal  to  sell  for  the  Chip- 
pewas  the  pine  timber  on  their  land,  valued  anywhere 
from  $5,000,000  to  $10,000,000,  and  devote  the  proceeds 
to  the  uses  of  the  Indians,  capitalizing  the  timber  for 
them  so  that  they  should  receive  a  fixed  income  for 
fifty  years,  and  in  certain  emergencies  five  per  cent,  of 
the  principal.  Mr.  Platt's  reasons  for  opposing  this 
plan  betrayed  an  intimate  knowledge  of  the  Indian 
character.  He  declared  that  the  very  worst  thing  that 
could  be  done  for  the  Indians  was  to  create  such  a  fund : 

I  think  the  result  will  be  that  at  the  end  of  fifty  years 
these  Indians  will  not  be  a  particle  more  advanced  toward 
civilization  than  they  are  to-day.  The  truth  is  that  the 
hardest  Indians  in  the  United  States  to  civilize  are  the 
richest  ones,  and  in  proportion  to  the  amount  of  their 


Protector  of  the  Indian  119 

riches.  You  cannot  break  up  the  tribal  relations  of  a  rich 
tribe  of  Indians  with  one  half  the  ease  that  you  can  among 
Indians  that  have  no  money.  Riches  bring  a  kind  of 
aristocracy  among  them,  and  they  maintain  their  manners 
and  their  customs  and  resist  every  possible  attempt  to 
civilize  them.  You  may  take  their  children  and  send 
them  to  school  at  Carlisle,  and  when  they  go  back  to  the 
tribe  they  have  either  to  be  driven  out  or  to  go  and  adopt 
the  customs  and  submit  themselves  to  the  regulations  of 
the  tribe. 

This  reference  to  Carlisle  touched  a  phase  of  the 
Indian  problem  upon  which  he  held  a  decided  opinion. 
For  many  years  he  was  convinced  of  the  futility  of 
bringing  Indian  youth  East  for  education  with  a  view 
to  their  return  to  their  own  people.  In  the  few  instances 
where  they  had  the  strength  to  adhere  to  their  Eastern 
training,  they  were  cast  off  by  their  tribe.  More  often 
they  returned  to  the  tribe,  enfeebled  physically  and 
morally,  fell  back  into  the  old  ways,  and  became  the 
most  worthless  Indians  on  the  reservation.  He  held 
that  the  missionaries  who  had  gone  out  and  spent  their 
lives  among  the  Indians  had  done  far  more  good  than 
the  Eastern  schools  or  professional  philanthropists, 
although  as  time  went  by  he  grew  to  value  the  work 
done  at  Carlisle  by  Capt.  R.  H.  Pratt. 

The  operation  of  the  treaties  with  the  five  civilized 
tribes  he  regarded  with  deep  disgust.  They  had  worked 
in  practice  to  the  injury  of  the  Indians,  for  whose  benefit 
they  were  originally  framed,  and  their  flagrant  abuse 
had  resulted  in  the  control  of  the  affairs  of  the  tribes 
by  unscrupulous  white  men  and  half-breeds  who 
occupied  the  most  productive  lands  and  profited  by  a 
fictitious  or  mongrel  relationship.  He  held  that,  under 
these  conditions,  the  United  States  was  not  bound  to 


120  Orville  H.  Platt 

abide  by  the  treaties  which  had  been  so  scandalously 
diverted  from  their  beneficent  purpose.  He  expressed 
this  opinion  forcibly  on  more  than  one  occasion. 
During  the  discussion  of  the  Indian  Appropriation  bill 
in  April,  1896,  he  undertook  to  secure  the  insertion  of 
an  amendment,  which  would  have  greatly  strengthened 
the  prestige  and  authority  of  the  Dawes  Commission 
with  the  five  tribes  with  whom  they  were  empowered 
to  negotiate.  The  amendment,  although  favorably 
reported  by  the  Indian  Committee,  was  opposed  by  a 
persistent  lobby,  and  was  finally  ruled  out  on  a  point  of 
order.  Some  of  those  who  opposed  the  amendment 
referred  unctuously  to  the  spires  of  the  Indian  churches 
ascending  to  heaven,  "  showing  that  they  are  followers 
of  that  meek  and  lowly  Nazarene,  that  Man  of  Galilee, 
to  whom  we  all  bow."  The  character  of  the  opposition 
filled  the  soul  of  the  Connecticut  Senator  with  wrath. 
He  declared  that  neither  in  Russia  nor  Turkey  was  the 
despotism  of  the  so-called  government  in  the  Indian 
Territory  equalled,  and  that  neither  in  Cuba  nor  any 
where  else  were  their  atrocities  surpassed.  The  ob 
jections  to  the  amendment  he  said  were  made,  not  in 
the  interest  of  the  Indians,  but  in  the  interest  of  white 
men  "who  have  not  a  drop  of  Indian  blood  in  their 
veins,  yet  who  dominate  these  tribes  and  these  nations 
with  as  heavy  a  hand  as  the  feudal  baron  ever  domi 
nated  the  people  of  his  barony."  He  asserted  that  in 
the  Indian  Territory  five  hundred  men,  largely  white, 
with  scarcely  a  half-blood  Indian  among  them,  had 
"seized,  appropriated,  and  hold  nine  tenths  of  the 
agricultural  land  to  the  exclusion  of  those  who  are 
entitled  equally  as  citizens  of  the  Territory  to  the  use 
and  benefit  of  that  land;  and  the  moment  any 
measure  is  proposed  looking  to  a  remedy  for  that 


Protector  of  the  Indian  121 

awful  injustice,  that  unholy  spoliation  of  the  Indians, 
our  wards,  whom  we  are  bound  to  protect,  then 
Senators  are  shocked  lest  some  rule  of  the  Senate 
should  be  transgressed."  Self-government  in  the 
Territory,  he  declared,  was  more  than  a  failure : 

It  is  a  shame,  a  disgrace,  an  intolerable  nuisance,  the 
five  hundred  men  who  have  seized  the  land  control  it  by 
the  corruption  of  the  Legislatures,  by  the.  corruption  of 
courts,  by  the  terrorizing  of  those  whose  lands  they  have 
seized.  ...  If  it  be  necessary  to  override  treaties,  if  in 
the  opinion  of  any  Senator  there  is  anything  in  the  amend 
ment  which  by  any  construction  or  by  any  stretch  of  con 
struction  can  be  held  as  not  living  up  to  the  letter  of  the 
treaties,  then  I  am  prepared  to  say  that  no  more  solemn 
obligation  ever  rested  upon  the  Senate  of  the  United  States 
than  to  disregard  those  treaties.  When  we  make  a  treaty 
with  an  Indian  nation,  we  make  it  not  only  for  ourselves 
but  for  the  Indians.  We  make  it  with  our  wards.  We 
make  it  with  a  people  whose  interests  we  are  bound  to 
protect,  and  when  the  letter  of  the  treaty  is  used  for  the 
oppression  of  those  people  by  men  who  have  thrust  them 
selves  into  the  situation  for  gain  and  for  personal  advance 
ment,  it  becomes  our  duty  to  see  that  the  spirit  in  which  the 
treaty  was  made  is  carried  out.  Five  hundred  people  of 
the  sixty  thousand  so-called  Indians  have  appropriated  the 
property  which  belongs  to  the  whole  number.  Civiliza 
tion  is  arrested,  progress  is  arrested,  the  real  Indian  is  re 
trograding;  he  is  going  back  to  a  state  of  savagery  and 
barbarism,  and  all  in  order  that  the  five  hundred  rob 
bers  and  despoilers  may  be  kept  in  their  unlawful  posses 
sions.  I  would  not  hesitate  to  disregard  a  treaty  if  it 
were  necessary  to  do  so  for  that  purpose. 

That  these  words  were  not  spoken  on  impulse  or 
without  full  consideration,  is  shown  by  the  fact  that 


122  Orville  H.  Platt 

earlier  in  the  session  Mr.  Platt  had  introduced  a  joint 
resolution,  declaring: 

That  the  condition  of  the  Indian  Territory  as  regards 
population,  occupation  of  land,  and  the  absence  of  adequate 
government  for  the  security  of  life  and  property  has  so 
changed  since  the  making  of  treaties  with  the  five  civilized 
tribes  that  the  United  States  is  no  longer  under  either  legal 
or  moral  obligation  to  guarantee  or  permit  tribal  Indian 
government  in  said  Territory,  and  should  at  once  take  such 
steps  as  may  be  necessary  to  protect  the  rights  and  liber 
ties  of  all  the  inhabitants  of  said  Territory. 

In  preparing  his  first  annual  message,  President 
McKinley  sent  for  Mr.  Platt  and  asked  him  to  prepare 
a  paragraph  covering  the  condition  of  affairs  in  the 
Indian  Territory,  with  special  reference  to  the  ratifica 
tion  of  the  agreement  recently  effected  by  the  Dawes 
Commission  with  the  Choctaws  and  Chickasaws.  In 
stead  of  complying  literally  with  this  request,  Mr. 
Platt  outlined  his  opinion  of  the  whole  Indian  problem 
in  a  letter  to  the  President,  dated  December  2,  1897, 
in  the  course  of  which  he  said : 

The  condition  of  affairs  in  the  Indian  Territory  is  a 
disgrace  to  our  government  and  our  civilization.  I  do 
not  believe  that  so  unjust,  iniquitous,  and  utterly  indefen 
sible  a  condition  of  affairs  exists  in  any  civilized  community 
in  the  world.  Under  the  guise  of  Indian  self-government, 
supposed  to  be  guaranteed  by  the  United  States,  we  permit 
practical  despotism  and  the  perpetration  of  unbounded 
injustice. 

The  treaties  made  with  the  Indians  dating  back  to  1838 
or  thereabouts,  with  modifications  and  perhaps  sanctions 
since  that  date,  were  made  upon  the  understood  agreement 
between  the  Indians  and  the  United  States,  that  the  Indians 
should  be  provided  with  a  territory  and  a  home  where  they 


Protector  of  the  Indian  123 

should  live  apart  from  the  whites  and  govern  themselves 
as  Indians,  having  a  common  tribal  title  to  the  land  in 
which  every  Indian  should  have  an  equal  interest  with 
every  other  Indian.  .  .  .  The  whole  situation  has  been 
changed  not  by  the  United  States,  but  by  the  action  of  the 
Indians  themselves. 

A  territory,  nearly  equal  in  extent  and  fertility  to  the 
State  of  Indiana,  has,  by  operation  of  Indian  laws  and 
the  action  of  Indian  governments,  been  given  practically 
into  the  possession  of  a  few  persons  who  have  little  or  no 
Indian  blood  in  their  veins,  but  are  recognized  as  members 
of  the  different  tribes  or  nations.  And  the  methods  by 
which  they  have  become  possessed,  and  the  Indian  enact 
ments  under  which  they  hold  this  vast  tract  or  territory, 
amount  almost  to  giving  them  a  fee-simple  title  and  occu 
pation.  The  real  Indians,  whose  interests  should  be  just 
as  much  the  care  of  the  United  States  now  as  when  the 
treaties  were  made,  have  been  despoiled,  their  use  of  lands 
which  have  any  value  has  been  denied,  and  their  whole 
condition  made  more  pitiable,  I  think,  than  the  condition 
of  any  other  Indians  in  the  United  States.  .  .  . 

To  allow  a  few  persons,  recognized  indeed  by  special 
enactment  as  Indian  citizens,  but  who  are  either  purely 
white  or  with  only  a  small  proportion  of  Indian  blood, 
longer  to  monopolize  these  lands,  would  be  an  unpardon 
able  neglect  of  duty  on  the  part  of  the  United  States. 
In  making  the  treaties  and  conveying  the  lands  to  the 
different  tribes,  the  United  States  imposed  a  trust  upon 
the  tribal  governments,  and  those  governments  assumed 
the  obligations  of  the  trust,  which  were  that  all  the 
members  should  have  equal  rights  in  the  use  and  occupa 
tion  of  the  lands.  That  trust  has  been  disregarded  and 
wantonly  violated  by  the  Indians,  and  no  pettifogging  with 
regard  to  the  language  of  the  treaties  and  the  powers 
given  to  the  different  governments  can  absolve  the  United 
States  from  its  obligation  to  see  that  the  trust  is  properly 
executed.  The  Indians  who  have  no  lands,  and  can  obtain 


i24  Orville  H.  Platt 

none,  because  they  have  been  appropriated  by  the  few  so- 
called  Indians,  must  be  protected  in  their  rights  and  put 
in  possession  of  their  fair  share  of  the  tribal  property. 
This  can  only  be  done  by  allotment,  either  of  the  use  and 
occupation,  or  of  a  full  title  to  the  land.  .  .  . 

Meanwhile  the  condition  of  the  white  people  who  have 
been  not  only  permitted  but  encouraged  to  go  into  the 
Territory  by  the  Indians,  demands  the  attention  of  our 
Government.  It  is  the  Indians  alone,  who  are  responsible 
for  the  presence  of  the  white  people,  amounting  probably 
to  250,000  domiciled  in  the  Indian  Territory,  as  against 
less  than  70,000  Indians.  They  are  without  local  govern 
ment,  without  the  privileges  of  American  civilization, 
without  the  opportunity  in  any  way  to  participate  in  the 
government  of  the  country  where  they  are  located;  white 
American  citizens  occupying  a  country  where,  by  law,  so 
far  as  the  local  affairs  are  concerned,  there  is  only  a  govern 
ment  of  Indians,  by  Indians,  and  for  Indians  in  existence. 
The  United  States  Government  certainly  owes  to  these 
citizens  the  duty  of  providing  for  them  the  opportunity 
which  other  citizens  of  the  United  States  enjoy,  to  have  a 
voice  in  their  own  government.  So  that  both  the  interests 
of  the  Indians  and  the  protection  and  the  development 
of  our  own  white  citizens  imperatively  demand  that  our 
Government  should,  without  further  delay,  change  the 
existing  conditions  in  the  Indian  Territory.  There  is 
nothing  in  the  spirit  of  the  treaties  to  prevent.  If  it  is 
supposed  in  the  letter  of  the  treaties  the  United  States 
Government  has  surrendered  its  rights  both  to  care  for  the 
Indians  and  protect  its  own  citizens,  it  is  sufficient  answer 
to  say  to  those  who  insist  that  nothing  shall  be  done,  "that 
the  letter  killeth,  but  the  spirit  giveth  life." 

One  hobby  he  had — the  appointment  of  fit  persons 
in  the  Indian  service.  He  was  especially  intolerant  of 
the  debauching  of  the  service  during  the  second  Cleve 
land  administration,  under  Secretary  Hoke  Smith. 


Protector  of  the  Indian  125 

On  one  occasion,  when  the  Indian  Rights  Associa 
tion  urged  him  to  assist  the  confirmation  of  some 
of  Smith's  appointments,  he  replied  hotly  to  Herbert 
Welsh: 

If  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  has  in  any  way  reformed, 
I  am  glad  to  hear  of  it.  He  has  been,  with  reference  to  the 
Indian  service  and  the  Territorial  service  in  general,  utterly 
shameless  in  the  matter  of  his  appointments,  not  that  I 
mean  he  has  always  gotten  bad  men ;  a  man  cannot  do  that 
always,  but  he  has  made  them  very  largely  upon  political 
grounds  and  for  political  purposes,  this  last  more  with 
regard  to  officials  in  Oklahoma,  perhaps,  than  elsewhere.  I 
think  it  is  susceptible  of  proof  that  he  has  said  that  he  pro 
posed  to  hold  the  Territory  of  Oklahoma  by  his  appoint 
ments  until  he  brought  it  in  as  a  Democratic  State.  I  don't 
want  to  say  harsh  things  about  any  one,  but  I  have  no 
patience  with  the  way  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  has 
administered  his  office  wherever  there  has  been  an  oppor 
tunity  to  appoint  an  impecunious  and  worthless  Democrat. 
If  of  late  he  has  done  any  better  than  formerly,  we  ought 
to  be  thankful  for  it.  I  have  not  yet  seen  the  evidence  of  it. 
The  States  in  which  there  are  Indian  reservations  are  mostly 
represented  by  Republican  Senators  and  Representatives,  so 
that  under  what  they  call  the  "Home-rule  System"  not  one 
of  them  could  have  the  slightest  influence  in  the  matter  of 
appointments.  When  Mr.  Harrison  was  President,  I 
believe  that  without  exception  he  appointed  men  from  the 
States  and  Territories  where  the  reservations  were  situated, 
and  by  comparison  he  got  a  very  much  better  set  of  officials. 
I  am  not  sure  that  it  is  a  rule  we  ought  to  follow  in  all 
instances.  The  suggestion,  that  these  men  who  are  now 
nominated  have  done  well  and  that  their  appointment  is 
something  in  the  nature  of  a  promotion,  has  great  force. 
But  as  between  the  practice  of  appointing  from  the  States 
and  sending  carpet-baggers  there,  I  can  have  but  one  opin 
ion.  I  have  known  a  man,  appointed  and  confirmed  by 


i26  Orville  H.  Platt 

the  Senate, — yes,  more  than  one, — whose  reputation  was 
that  the  first  inquiry  they  made  on  their  rounds  as  Indian 
inspectors,  was  for  an  Indian  girl  to  sleep  with.  I  have 
known  men  who  were  thieves  and  seducers  at  home,  con 
firmed  by  the  Senate,  when  the  record  was  plain.  I  have 
been  so  absolutely  disheartened  and  disgusted  with  the 
character  of  men  that  were  sent  from  other  States  to  be 
Indian  agents  and  inspectors,  that  I  am  ready  to  turn  to 
almost  anything  with  the  belief  that  it  cannot  be  worse  than 
what  has  been  done.  The  appointment  of  army  officers 
relieved  the  trouble  somewhat  so  far  as  character  is  con 
cerned,  but  an  army  officer  does  not  make  the  best  agent 
always,  or  indeed  usually. 

He  never  hesitated  to  address  himself,  with  whole 
some  frankness,  to  the  well-intentioned  people  who  had 
voluntarily  taken  upon  themselves  the  responsibility 
for  the  proper  settlement  of  the  Indian  question. 
When  the  Outlook  in  March,  1902,  published  an  article 
on  "The  Lease  of  the  Standing  Rock  Reservation/' 
taking  Congress  and  the  administration  severely  to 
task,  he  wrote  promptly  to  Dr.  Lyman  Abbott  : 

Some  one  has  sent  me  the  Outlook  for  March  2gth,  with 
a  marked  article  by  Mr.  Kinman,  "The  Lease  of  the  Stand 
ing  Rock  Reservation."  I  regret  to  say  that  I  do  not 
remember  to  have  ever  seen,  within  the  same  space,  so 
much  of  statement  and  insinuation  calculated  to  give  an 
entirely  erroneous  impression  as  to  the  facts  as  in  that 
article.  Surely  you  cannot  suppose  that  the  Secretary 
of  the  Interior,  and  the  Indian  Commissioner,  and  Com 
mittees  of  Congress,  are  either  corruptly  or  stupidly  trying 
to  despoil  the  Indians  of  their  rights. 

In  the  winter  of  1900-01,  a  proposition  was  brought 
into  the  Senate,  looking  to  the  construction  of  a  dam 
across  the  Gila  River,  near  San  Carlos,  Arizona,  to 


Protector  of  the  Indian  127 

store  the  waters  of  the  river  for  the  benefit  of  the 
Pima  Indian  reservation.  The  Pima  Indians  from 
time  immemorial  had  supported  themselves  largely 
by  agriculture  under  irrigation.  White  settlers  on  the 
upper  portion  of  the  Gila  River,  having  taken  up  their 
lands  under  government  laws,  had  diverted  the  water 
so  that  the  Indians  were  deprived  of  its  use.  Mr. 
Platt  believed  that  the  Government  ought,  at  any 
practicable  cost,  to  supply  water  to  the  reservation 
for  the  benefit  of  the  Indians,  but  he  believed  also  that 
all  the  water  needed  for  irrigating  lands  upon  their 
reservation  could  be  obtained  without  resorting  to  the 
expedient  of  building  a  dam  130  miles  above  the  reser 
vation,  at  an  estimated  cost  of  $1,000,000  to  $2,000,000. 
He  recognized  in  the  proposed  amendment  a  scheme 
to  commit  the  Government  to  a  system  of  national 
irrigation — a  system  to  which  he  was  not  necessarily 
opposed,  but  which  he  felt  should  not  be  entered  upon 
without  the  most  careful  consideration.  The  National 
Irrigation  Association  and  the  Geological  Survey  ear 
nestly  advocated  the  legislation,  and,  to  supplement 
their  work,  the  friends  of  the  Indian  were  rounded  up 
and  induced  to  pelt  sympathetic  Senators  with  petitions 
and  appeals.  To  one  of  these  philanthropists,  Mr. 
Platt  responded: 

I  have  an  idea,  and  I  may  as  well  express  it  frankly, 
that  your  board,  and  other  people  throughout  the  United 
States  who  are  friends  of  the  Indians,  have  overestimated 
the  necessity  of  spending  a  couple  of  million  of  dollars, 
more  or  less,  to  irrigate  the  Pima  reservation.  The  plan 
is  being  pushed  from  two  sources:  One,  philanthropic 
people  who  desire  to  subserve  the  interests  of  the  Indians, 
and  the  other,  the  National  Irrigation  Association,  that  has 
fixed  upon  this  plan  to  commit  the  Government  to  a  system 


128  Orville  H.  Platt 

of  national  irrigation,  which  if  once  entered  into  will  cost 
hundreds,  and  possibly  thousands,  of  millions  of  dollars. 
I  myself  believe  that  all  the  irrigation  needed  at  present 
by  these  Indians  can  be  provided  without  embarking  in 
this  very  expensive  enterprise.  I  think  the  sufferings 
of  the  Indians  have  been  very  much  overdrawn.  We  were 
told  last  year  that  they  were  in  a  starving  condition,  and 
that  it  would  take  at  least  $50,000  to  support  them  for 
the  year.  We  appropriated  $30,000,  of  which  only  $7,000 
has  been  used,  and  I  think  that  the  use  of  that  money  has 
relieved  any  actual  suffering.  I  believe  that  with  $10,000 
expenditure,  the  work  to  be  performed  by  the  Indians, 
their  lands  can  be  irrigated,  for  the  present  at  least,  and  I 
think  that  the  philanthropic  friends  of  the  Indians  through 
out  the  United  States  ought  to  be  very  careful  that  they 
are  not  made  use  of  to  try  to  commit  the  Government  to  a 
system  of  national  irrigation. 

While  he  at  no  time  relished  the  irksome  work  on  the 
Indian  Committee,  he  nevertheless  took  quiet  satis 
faction  in  the  thought  that  he  was  rendering  a  valuable 
service  both  to  the  Indian  and  to  his  own  Government. 
When  in  1902  he  secured  an  amendment  to  a  bill  open 
ing  to  settlement  the  Rosebud  reservation  in  South 
Dakota,  by  which  settlers,  instead  of  obtaining  free 
entry,  were  required  to  buy  at  the  rate  of  $2.50  an 
acre  for  their  lands,  he  wrote  home  to  a  friend  in 
Meriden : 

I  suppose  the  world  would  go  on  if  I  should  die,  but 
while  I  am  here  in  the  Senate  there  is  always  something 
depending  on  me  especially.  Just  now  it  is  the  Indian 
Appropriation  bill;  next  week  it  will  probably  be  Cuba, 
if  the  House  passes  some  bill,  and  so  it  goes.  What  a  man 
does  quietly  is  never  known  or  appreciated.  For  in 
stance — I  put  an  amendment  into  a  bill  to-day  for  the  open 
ing  of  an  Indian  reservation  which  is  likely  to  save  the 


Protector  of  the  Indian  129 

Government,  first  and  last,  if  the  same  policy  is  continued 
with  reference  to  other  matters  of  a  similar  kind,  at  least 
$50,000,000.  I  feel  that  I  have  to  watch  these  things, 
but  still  I  am  looking  forward  to  trying  to  find  the  time 
when  I  can  get  to  Connecticut;  wish  I  could  get  there  on 
Good-Friday. 

When  he  became  Chairman  of  the  Committee  on 
Cuban  Relations,  he  endeavored  to  escape  further 
service  on  the  Indian  Committee,  but  the  urgency  of 
those  interested  in  the  integrity  of  Indian  legislation 
prevailed  upon  him  to  remain.  To  one  of  these 
friendly  advisers,  F.  J.  Kingsbury,  of  Waterbury,  Con 
necticut,  he  wrote,  on  March  10,  1901: 

The  Indian  question,  as  it  is  called,  is  one  of  great  dif 
ficulty.  If  it  is  considered  from  the  sympathetic  side 
merely,  that  is  one  thing.  If  it  is  considered  from  the 
practical  side,  that  is  often  an  entirely  different  thing. 
It  perplexes  the  wisest  and  best  to  know  what  is  to  be  done 
in  given  instances.  There  is  enough  work  on  the  Indian 
Committee  to  take  the  entire  time  of  any  Senator,  and  then 
he  would  be  as  uncertain  as  to  the  best  practical  thing  to 
be  done  as  he  is  now.  I  have  felt  that  I  ought  to  go  off 
from  the  Indian  Committee,  and  yet  I  think  it  is  no  egotism 
to  say  that  for  some  years  I  have  stood  between  the  Indians 
and  a  disposition  in  a  good  many  quarters  to  consider  the 
wishes  of  white  people  rather  than  the  interests  of  the 
Indians.  You  cannot  look  at  an  Indian  reservation  in  this 
country  without  seeing  a  case  for  the  Supreme  Court  of  the 
United  States.  The  questions  arising  are  most  perplexing 
and  complicated.  I  really  have  not  the  time  to  give  to 
them.  I  am  second  on  the  Judiciary  Committee,  third  on 
Finance,  Chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Relations  with  Cuba, 
either  one  of  which,  to  say  nothing  of  the  Indian  Committee, 
involves  great  labor,  and  I  feel  as  if  I  ought  to  give  some 
attention,  indeed  careful  consideration,  to  the  great  public 


Orville  H.  Platt 

questions  which  loom  up  now  as  never  before.  I  do  not 
know  what  to  do  about  staying  on  the  Indian  Committee. 
Nothing  that  I  can  do  will  satisfy  either  side,  for  both  the 
benevolent  Indian  sympathizers,  and  those  who  have  no 
regard  for  the  Indians  when  the  white  man's  interest  is 
involved,  are  extremists.  Truth  here,  as  in  most  all 
matters,  lies  in  the  middle. 

But  with  all  his  discriminating  conscientiousness 
in  legislation,  it  was  through  the  personal  side  of  his 
relations  to  the  Indian  that  his  service  on  the  Committee 
had  its  peculiar  value.  For  twenty  years  he  was  the 
real  friend  and  champion  of  the  Indians,  and  they  re 
garded  him  as  they  would  a  father.  From  all  over  the 
country  the  Indians  seemed  to  know  that  Senator 
Platt  would  befriend  them,  and  see  that  justice  would  be 
done,  and  they  always  felt  free  to  write  him.  Of  this 
phase  of  his  experience,  one  who  had  peculiarly  close 
relations  with  Mr.  Platt  during  the  last  years  of  his 
life  says: 

One  characteristic  letter,  I  remember,  came  from  "Mak 
She  Ka  Tan  No, "  who  made  his  mark,  which  was  witnessed 
by  "Wm.  Myer"  and  "Sal  Williams."  This  was  written 
from  Shawnee,  O.  T.,  March  4,  1903,  and  reads: 

"Honorable  0.  H.  Platt,  United  States  Senate,  Washing 
ton,  D.  C.  Dear  Sir :  I  have  been  told  you  know  a  great  deal 
about  Indians  and  the  Indian  business,  that  you  are  one 
of  the  Senate  council  for  that  purpose.  I  am  a  poor  Kicka- 
poo  Indian  boy.  A  few  years  ago  when  the  Government 
allotted  land  to  the  Kickapoo  Indians  in  Oklahoma  some 
of  us  were  left  out  and  got  no  land.  I  am  a  full  blood  In 
dian,  my  father  and  mother  were  full  blood  Kickapoo  In 
dians,  and  the  letter  I  hand  you  herewith,  which  I  ask  you 
to  transmit  to  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior  with  such 
recommendations  as  you  may  deem  proper,  explains  to 


Protector  of  the  Indian  131 

you  that  it  is  in  the  power  of  the  Government  to  yet  give 
me  an  allotment.  Trusting  you  will  be  kind  enough  to 
do  something  for  me,  I  am 

KATAN  No." 


Senator  Platt  took  as  much  trouble  and  pains  with 
this  Indian  as  he  would  have  taken  with  any  man  in  Con 
necticut  ;  he  took  it  up  with  the  Secretary  of  the  Interior, 
and  the  matter  covered  most  of  the  summer;  the  "Kicking 
Kickapoo"  band  was  involved,  and  finally  this  Indian 
received  his  allotment,  as  well  as  others  shown  to  be  entitled, 
on  the  diminished  Kickapoo  reserve  in  Kansas. 

Even  when  Senator  Platt  was  obliged  to  give  up  his 
membership  on  the  Committee  on  Indian  Affairs  he  still 
helped  to  scrutinize  the  Appropriation  bill,  and  was  looked 
to  for  advice  in  the  Senate,  and  appealed  to  by  Indians 
without  number  or  limit. 

I  think  one  of  the  most  affecting  scenes  I  witnessed,  in 
connection  with  his  official  life,  was  during  the  session 
towards  the  end  of  1903,  or  1904.  As  usual  the  Indians 
were  in  Washington  to  look  after  their  interests.  They 
had  been  going  to  see  the  Senator,  and  sending  him  mes 
sages,  and  going  through  the  regular  evolutions,  to  all  of 
which  he  gave  patient  attention.  One  day  a  delegation  of 
braves,  probably  numbering  fifty,  possibly  more,  were  at 
the  Capitol  to  see  him.  He  was  much  pressed  for  time,  as 
usual,  was  working  on  an  important  amendment  to  the 
Indian  bill,  together  with  other  matters,  but  he  left  the 
Senate  floor,  and  came  to  his  committee-room,  walked  over 
and  sank  down  in  a  chair  by  the  window.  An  interpreter 
was  present,  who  seated  himself  near  the  Senator,  and  all 
the  balance  ranged  themselves  around  the  room,  close  to 
the  walls,  hunched  up,  watching  the  Senator  intently,  who 
surely  was  the  personification  of  the  "Big  White  Father." 

All  he  said  was:  "Now  tell  me  all  about  it,"  turning  to 
the  interpreter,  who  proceeded  to  make  explanations, 
while  the  Senator  sat  as  silent  as  the  Indians.  He  asked 


132  Orville  H.  Platt 

some  questions,  pointing  first  to  one  and  then  to  another 
of  the  Indians,  saying,  "Just  what  is  it  you  want — and 
why?"  He  spent  a  couple  of  hours,  and  then  rose  up, 
while  all  those  in  the  room  did  likewise,  and  in  precisely 
the  same  fashion,  and  then  he  said,  first  directly  to  one 
and  then  to  another,  "That  you  cannot  have;  it  is  not 
right ;  you  are  not  entitled  to  it ;  the  Government  does  not 
owe  it  to  you."  To  another,  "I  will  look  into  it."  To 
another,  always  pointing  to  the  one  intended,  and  never 
confusing  any  particular  request  or  demand,  "you  shall 
have  it,"  and  so  on.  Finally,  "I  say  to  you — you  shall 
have  justice;  I  shall  look  after  you."  Then  straight  to 
the  door  he  walked  without  a  word  further  or  gesture, 
while  the  entire  delegation  muttered  the  Indian  grunt  of 
satisfaction  and  approval — "Ugh!  Ugh!  Big  Chief!  Big 
White  Father!  "  and  all  slowly  passed  out  after  him,  single 
file.  They  had  formed  a  line  down  which  he  passed  much 
after  the  fashion  of  the  Indians  at  the  little  Catholic  Church 
up  at  Wequetonsing,  Michigan,  when  the  Father  passes 
out  from  celebrating  Mass  on  Sunday  mornings. 

Among  the  eulogies  delivered  after  his  death,  there 
was  none  more  fitting  than  that  of  Senator  Morgan  of 
Alabama,  a  political  opponent,  who  had  seen  years  of 
service  with  him  on  the  Indian  Committee : 

As  the  great  and  proud  race  of  Indians  are  disappearing 
from  their  fatherland,  which  no  Indian  would  ever  desert 
nor  be  driven  from  it  save  by  forces  that  made  death  the 
penalty  of  resistance,  none  of  them  will  forget  the  sympathy 
of  Senator  Platt  in  his  patient,  just,  and  humane  devotion 
to  the  rights  that  remained  to  them  after  more  than  two 
centuries  of  warfare  for  the  maintenance  of  their  original 
independence.  He  provided  for  them  in  their  necessitous 
condition  almost  as  a  father  would  provide  for  his  family. 
His  great  abilities  and  industrious  labors  were  always 
engaged  in  their  service  when  needed,  so  that  none  were 


Protector  of  the  Indian  133 

neglected;  and  the  records  of  the  Senate  are  a  history  of 
his  work  that  carries  honor  to  his  memory  on  every  page 
that  relates  to  Indian  affairs. 

His  only  possible  reward  was  the  consciousness  of  duty 
well  and  honestly  performed. 

The  proud  and  silent  nod  of  the  grateful  Indian  in 
approbation  of  the  equally  proud  and  silent  assistance  of 
the  great  Senator  was  the  only  token  of  friendship  between 
men  who  were  sternly  just  in  their  actions,  and  neither  of 
them  asked  nor  expected  nor  granted  favors. 


CHAPTER  X 

NEW  STATES  IN  THE  WEST 

Chairman  of  Committee  on  Territories — Instrumental  in  Admitting 
Six  New  States— In  Close  Touch  with  the  West. 

A  SYMPATHY  as  broad  as  the  Continent,  an  under 
standing  which  comprehended  the  needs  and 
aspirations  of  every  State  and  Territory  helped  to  make 
Platt  of  Connecticut  in  all  the  name  implies  a  Senator 
of  the  United  States.  A  New  Englander  of  Puritan 
descent,  he  was  an  American  citizen  first  of  all,  and  the 
star  that  represented  California  on  the  flag  was  as 
significant  to  him  as  that  which  marked  his  native 
State.  His  connection  with  the  Indian  Committee 
brought  him  in  close  touch  with  the  country  beyond 
the  Mississippi,  and  years  of  service  with  the  Committee 
on  Territories  gave  him  an  acquaintance  with  the  Far 
West  which  gained  him  recognition  as  the  Eastern 
Senator  most  conversant  with  its  problems  and  sym 
pathetic  with  its  aims.  He  watched  the  growth  of 
the  Western  country  with  satisfaction  and  pride.  It 
carried  to  him  no  message  of  apprehension  for  the  fu 
ture  of  his  own  region.  The  threatened  encroachments 
upon  the  influence  of  New  England  did  not  disturb  him. 
"New  England  has  no  fears  for  the  future,"  he  said. 
"She  has  heard  the  cries  of  'cotton  is  king',  'wheat  is 
king,'  'iron  is  king';  and  has  heard  them  unmoved. 

134 


New  States  in  the  West  135 

She  knows  there  is  no  real  kingship  in  the  United  States 
but  the  sovereignty  of  ideas."1 

Western  men  learned  to  trust  him  and  confide  in 
him.  He  bore  toward  some  of  the  younger  of  them  an 
almost  paternal  relationship,  and  they  went  to  him 
like  children  for  encouragement  and  help.  The  affection 
with  which  they  grew  to  regard  him  seemed,  at  times, 
incongruous  with  the  practical  workings  of  the  legis 
lative  machine,  yet  it  contributed  subtly  and  often 
times  indispensably  to  its  effective  operation.  Since 
his  death  no  one  has  quite  taken  the  peculiar  place  he 
occupied  as  a  link  between  the  East  and  West.2 

1  Speech  advocating  the  admission  of  Washington,  March  3,  1886. 

2  Western  men  are  fond  of  telling  about  the  positive  way  in  which 
he  handled  questions  relating  to  their  part  of  the  country,   dis 
closing  a  shrewd  and  appreciative  understanding  of  the  Western 
character. 

Once  when  the  Utah  question  was  up  before  the  Territories 
Committee  he  asked  a  man  who  appeared  in  behalf  of  the  Mormon 
side:  "Do  you  know  Abbott  R.  Heywood  of  Ogden?  Is  he  a 
truthful  man?"  Heywood  was  Chairman  of  the  Liberal  party  in 
Utah  and  Mr.  Platt  was  palpably  toying  with  a  letter  which  from 
the  heading  evidently  came  from  him.  The  answer  was:  "Yes,  I 
know  Mr.  Abbott  R.  Heywood  and  I  think  that  he  is  a  truthful 
man."  The  Senator  chuckled  drily,  opened  the  letter,  and  said: 
"You  have  made  a  lucky  reply.  I  guess  you  are  a  truthful  man 
too.  Abbott  Heywood  says  that  you  are  all  right  and  he  takes 
your  view  of  this  particular  part  of  the  case. "  Later  when  state 
hood  was  on  the  point  of  gaining  or  losing  and  his  decision  was 
likely  to  settle  the  question,  he  asked  for  Abbott  R.  Heywood 's 
opinion  and  got  it.  When  overzealous  friends  of  statehood  had 
made  rash  assertions  in  their  eagerness  to  gain  his  support  he  sent 
for  the  man  whom  he  had  once  before  tested  on  Heywood 's  letter 
and  said :  "  I  '11  take  your  word  and  no  one  else's  among  the  Mormons 
on  this  question.  Have  these  people,  any  of  them,  been  living  with 
their  plural  wives  since  the  manifesto?"  "Yes,  Senator,"  was 
the  reply,  "there  has  been  a  case  now  and  then,  but  the  Gentiles 
have  not  chosen  to  prosecute  it  because  they  believe  the  Church 
will  discountenance  the  practice  and  if  the  pulpit  will  range  itself 
with  the  law  it  cannot  go  on.  "  "Well,  "  was  Mr.  Platt's  comment, 


136  Orville  H.  Platt 

It  was  partly  a  matter  of  chance  that  he  had  so  much 
to  do  with  the  admission  of  new  States  to  the  Union, 
but  while  he  was  Chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Terri 
tories  it  happened  that  six  stars  were  added  to  the  flag 
and  that  it  fell  to  him  to  secure  the  enactment  of  the 
bills  creating  six  commonwealths, — a  record  which 
stands  to  the  credit  of  no  other  public  man  since  the 
beginning  of  the  Government.  It  is  true  that  Idaho, 
Montana,  North  Dakota,  South  Dakota,  Washington, 
and  Wyoming  would  sooner  or  later  have  been  admitted 
to  the  sisterhood  of  States,  for  the  times  were  ripening 
for  the  change,  but  the  date  and  manner  of  their 
admission  might  have  been  far  different  had  it  not  been 
for  the  tact  and  integrity  of  the  Senator  who  had  their 
fortunes  in  charge,  and  for  the  confidence  which  he 
inspired.  A  narrow-minded  partisan  in  his  position 
might  have  been  a  serious  obstacle  in  the  way.  But 
Platt  was  broad  enough  to  grasp  the  true  significance  of 
the  development  of  the  West.  He  believed  with 
Seward  that  Territories  should  be  transformed  into 
States  just  as  soon  as  local  circumstances  justified  the 
change.  He  held  to  the  conviction  that  the  sooner  a 
Territory  emerges  from  its  provincial  condition  the 
better,  and  the  sooner  the  people  are  admitted  to 
participate  in  the  responsibilities  of  government,  the 
stronger  and  more  vigorous  the  State  those  people 
form  will  be;  that  the  longer  the  process  of  pupilage 
the  greater  will  be  the  effect  of  federal  patronage  and 
federal  influence  upon  them.  To  his  mind  there  were 
four  conditions  of  admission.  First,  there  must  be 
sufficient  territory;  second,  that  territory  must  have 

"they  say  that  you  are  New  England  folks  out  in  Utah.  If  you 
are  and  will  live  up  to  New  England  traditions  you  will  soon  get 
into  line  for  the  country  and  you  will  stand  by  it  to  the  death. " 


New  States  in  the  West  137 

the  requisite  population;  third,  it  must  have  resources 
which  promise  development;  fourth,  it  must  have  a 
people  whose  character  is  a  guarantee  of  a  republican 
form  of  government.  Throughout  his  career  in  the 
Senate,  he  favored  the  admission  of  new  States  when 
ever  these  conditions  were  fulfilled.  In  advocating  the 
admission  of  the  State  of  Washington  in  1886,  he  said : 

Whatever  the  future  may  develop  with  regard  to  the 
acquisition  of  territory — whatever  we  may  think  with 
regard  to  Alaska,  which  is  territory  acquired  outside  of 
what  I  may  call  our  integral  territory,  it  seems  to  me  that 
with  reference  to  the  territory  which  we  have,  which  is  now 
circumscribed  by  the  lines  which  bound  upon  the  north 
what  is  called  "The  United  States,"  there  can  be  no 
question  but  that  the  same  rule  of  admission  is  to  be 
applied  now  with  regard  to  those  territories  as  has  been 
applied  in  the  past.  The  people  of  those  Territories  are 
not  full  American  citizens,  are  not  fully  entitled  to  the 
rights  of  other  citizens  of  the  United  States,  do  not  fully 
illustrate  the  principles  of  self-government,  until  they  are 
admitted  to  become  participants  in  the  general  union  of 
States. 

It  has  been  said  that  in  this  admission  of  new  Western 
States  he  saw  no  reason  to  fear  for  the  influence  of  New 
England.  He  recognized  that,  as  the  country  grew  in 
wealth  and  population,  New  England  of  necessity  would 
count  for  less  and  less  in  a  material  way  and  that  her 
influence  must  depend  upon  the  character  of  her  people 
and  her  representatives.  But  he  took  an  even  broader 
view  than  that.  He  saw  with  a  prophet's  eye  that  her 
real  supremacy  must  be  maintained  through  the  right 
development  of  the  country  to  the  West,  and  he  pro 
tested  earnestly  against  the  theory  advanced  by  some 
that  her  true  policy  was  to  prevent  if  possible  any 


138  Orville  H.  Platt 

addition  to  the  existing  number  of  States  lest  she  should 
be  shorn  of  a  portion  of  the  strength  she  then  possessed. 
Pleading  for  Washington  in  1886,  and  speaking  for 
New  England,  he  said  her  Senators  were  haunted  by 
no  such  fear: 

The  policy  of  New  England  with  respect  to  national 
growth  has  never  been  one  of  exclusion  or  repression ;  on 
the  contrary,  it  has  been  the  policy  of  the  admission  of  new 
States  and  the  consequent  enhancement  of  national  strength. 
Examine  the  record,  and  you  will  find  that  opposition  to 
the  admission  of  States  has  not  come  from  New  England 
either  in  the  Senate  or  House.  We  have  learned,  and  we 
know  full  well,  that  we  cannot  maintain  our  place  and 
influence  in  the  national  household  by  numerical  power. 
It  takes  but  a  few  years  in  the  great  march  of  national 
progress  to  build  up  new  communities  that  in  population 
and  wealth  and  numerical  representation  can  more  than 
compete  with  New  England.  No,  sir;  we  understand  if, 
as  we'  hope  and  trust,  New  England  is  to  maintain  in  the 
future  as  she  has  in  the  past  a  conspicuous,  if  not  potential, 
place  in  the  councils  of  the  nation  she  must  base  her  claim 
to  such  notice  on  something  besides  numbers  or  wealth. 

We  have  learned,  indeed  we  have  always  realized,  that 
there  are  invisible  forces  which  can  make  a  small  State 
great ;  that  the  true  sources  of  power  are  in  the  brains  and 
hearts  of  a  people,  be  they  many  or  few.  So  long  as  New 
England  can  maintain  for  her  citizens  a  high  standard  of 
intelligence,  of  virtue,  and  national  love,  I  have  no  mis 
givings  as  to  the  position  she  will  occupy  in  the  Republic. 
If  her  Senators  can  truly  and  worthily  represent  a  people 
with  such  characteristics,  they  need  never  fear  that  their 
voice  will  be  unheeded.  Once  New  England  cast  exactly 
one  third  of  the  votes  in  this  branch  of  the  national  legisla 
ture.  Now  she  casts  less  than  one  sixth  of  them,  and  yet 
she  does  not  feel  that  she  has  been  shorn  of  her  strength 
or  that  her  influence  has  departed  or  waned.  .  .  . 


New  States  in  the  West  139 

Why  should  New  England  be  thought  to  fear  or  regret 
the  admission  of  new  States?  Cast  your  eye  along  the 
parallels  of  latitude  which  stretch  from  the  Atlantic  coast 
to  the  Pacific  shore.  Study  the  characteristics  of  that 
marvellous  civilization  which  has  redeemed  the-  land  and 
subjugated  the  forces  of  nature  along  those  parallels. 
Take  note  of  the  people  who  along  those  lengthened  lines 
have  builded  cities,  developed  agriculture,  penetrated  the 
deep  recesses  of  the  earth,  created  a  highway,  yes,  high 
ways  for  the  nation,  established  the  institutions  of  educa 
tion  and  religion,  elevated  and  glorified  mankind.  Who 
are  they?  Are  they  not  bone  of  our  bone  and  flesh  of  our 
flesh?  The  blood  of  New  England  courses  along  every 
artery  of  national  life.  Put  your  finger  on  the  pulse  of 
enterprise  as  it  beats  in  Walla  Walla,  or  Seattle,  or  Tacoma, 
or  Port  Townsend,  and  you  will  feel  the  heart-throb  of  New 
England.  Who  are  these  men  who  to-day  are  asking  the 
Senate  permission  to  enjoy  the  full  privileges  of  American 
citizenship  in  the  new  State  of  Washington?  True,  they 
have  gathered  from  many  States ;  they  have  come  even  from 
foreign  lands,  from  lands  beyond  the  sea;  a  new  people 
indeed,  but  how  many  of  them  can  trace  back  their  vigor 
and  force  to  the  ancestral  cottage  which  stood  on  the  New 
England  hillside,  their  patriotism  to  the  village  green,  and 
their  virtue  to  the  New  England  church  ?  The  voice  which 
I  bring  to  them  to-day  from  their  ancestral  States  is,  "  Come 
in,  and  welcome." 

Washington  was  not  admitted  as  a  State  during  the 
Forty-ninth  Congress.  The  bill  for  its  admission  passed 
the  Senate,  providing  for  the  incorporation  of  the  Pan 
handle  of  Idaho  into  the  new  State,  but  the  measure  did 
not  pass  the  House.  When  the  proposal  came  again  in 
the  Fiftieth  Congress,  in  1888,  Mr.  Platt  favored  the 
admission  of  a  State  containing  the  original  boundaries 
of  Washington  and  leaving  Idaho  undisturbed,  a 


140  Orville  H.  Platt 

provision  which  finally  prevailed,  although  not  favored 
by  the  majority  of  the  Territories  Committee.  In  the 
Fiftieth  Congress,  the  Committee  on  Territories  reported 
favorably  four  bills  looking  to  the  admission  of  new 
States  into  the  Union — Washington,  Montana,  and  the 
two  Dakotas.  It  had  been  proposed  to  admit  the 
northern  half  of  the  Territory  of  Dakota  as  a  State  under 
the  name  of  "Lincoln."  The  people  of  the  Territory 
objected,  and  several  Democratic  Senators,  among  them 
Mr.  Butler  of  South  Carolina,  took  them  to  task  for 
what  was  termed  a  lack  of  reverence  for  the  name 
of  the  great  emancipator.  Mr.  Platt  confessed  his 
sympathy  with  the  people  of  the  Territory  in  this. 

'The  condition  is  such,"  he  said,  "that  the  name  of 
Dakota  cannot  be  taken  away  from  either  portion  of 
the  Territory  without  injustice,  and  without  doing 
violence  to  the  wishes  and  feelings  of  the  Territory." 

As  for  the  charge  of  irreverence  brought  by  Mr. 
Butler,  he  said  : 

Suppose  that  some  one  should  propose  to  change  the 
name  of  the  Senator  and  call  him  by  the  name  of  the  most 
illustrious  of  all  Presidents,  the  father  of  his  country, 
and  that  his  name  henceforth,  instead  of  being  Matthew 
C.  Butler  should  be  Matthew  C.  Washington,  and  that  he 
should  object  and  say,  "My  name  is  Butler;  I  do  not  desire 
to  change  it."  Would  he  be  held  lacking  in  respect  and 
admiration  for  the  great  name  of  Washington?  Not  at 
all.  And  no  more  are  the  soldiers  of  North  Dakota,  who 
followed  the  flag  and  carried  the  musket,  who,  under  the 
lead  of  the  great  Lincoln,  preserved  the  Government  when 
it  was  assailed — no  more  are  they  to  be  charged  with  being 
wanting  in  respect  to  the  name  of  Lincoln.  I  congratulate 
the  Senator  from  South  Carolina,  and  I  congratulate  the 
country  on  his  new-born  zeal  and  admiration  for  the  memory 
of  Lincoln. 


New  States  in  the  West  141 

The  Democrats  in  the  House,  having  a  majority  there, 
and  enjoying  the  support  of  a  Democratic  adminis 
tration,  not  unnaturally  undertook  to  prevent  the 
admission  of  four  Republican  States  on  the  eve  of  an 
election  for  President,  and  made  an  issue  by  proposing 
the  admission  of  Dakota  as  one  State  while  New  Mexico 
was  to  be  brought  in  as  a  Democratic  balance.  A 
caucus  of  the  Democrats  of  the  House  adopted  this 
resolution : 

Resolved,  That  it  is  the  sense  of  the  caucus  that  an 
enabling  act  for  the  Territories  of  Dakota,  Montana,  Wash 
ington,  and  New  Mexico  should  be  passed  at  this  session, 
providing  for  constitutional  conventions  in  each  Territory, 
and  the  submission  of  those  constitutions  for  ratifica 
tion  at  an  election  in  November,  1888,  substantially  as 
provided  for  in  the  bill  reported  by  the  Committee  on 
Territories  at  this  session. 

Mr.  Platt  contended  that  the  people  of  the  southern 
part  of  Dakota  had  a  right  to  participate  in  the  next 
election  for  President;  that  they  ought  to  have  been 
admitted  long  ago.  He  declared  that  Congress  had 
been  derelict  in  its  duty,  that  it  had  temporized  and 
postponed  the  creation  of  the  State  until  it  had  become 
400,000  strong,  a  population  greater  than  that  of  Rhode 
Island,  Vermont,  New  Hampshire,  Delaware,  Florida, 
Oregon,  Nebraska,  Nevada,  or  Colorado,  and  that  the 
fact  that  another  presidential  election  was  approaching 
was  no  reason  why  they  should  now  be  denied  admission 
into  the  Union  as  quickly  as  it  could  be  done.  He 
quoted  the  treaty  with  France  ceding  the  Territory  of 
Louisiana  of  which  Dakota  was  a  part,  and  the  North 
west  Ordinance  of  1787,  as  extended  in  1834,  to  show 
that  the  people  of  the  Territory  had  morally  a  right  to 


142  Orville  H.  Platt 

be  admitted  to  the  Union.  At  the  same  time  he  con 
tended  that  the  Territory  was  too  large  to  be  admitted 
as  one  State.  It  was  larger  by  27,000  square  miles 
than  England,  Ireland,  Scotland,  and  Wales — practi 
cally  as  large  as  New  York,  Pennsylvania,  New  Jer 
sey,  Maryland,  and  Virginia,  and  capable  of  supporting 
as  large  a  population: 

Even  if  the  sentiment  of  the  people  were  not  adverse  to  it 
and  the  people  had  a  dream  of  empire  to  grow  out  of  the 
admission  of  such  a  great  State,  yet  Congress,  having  refer 
ence  to  the  physical  equality  of  all  the  States,  ought  not 
to  think  of  admitting  one  State  into  the  Union  so  capable  of 
sustaining  a  dense  population. 

The  idea  of  proper  self-government  repelled  the 
notion  that  such  a  State  would  not  be  too  large.  It  was 
impossible  for  the  common  people  to  take  part  in  the 
concerns  of  a  State  of  that  size.  The  expense  of  travel 
to  conventions  and  to  the  Legislature  would  practically 
shut  them  out  from  a  participation  in  the  privileges  of 
government,  relegating  the  conduct  of  affairs  to  the 
rich  or  unscrupulous.  It  would  amount  also  to  a 
practical  denial  of  the  administration  of  justice  in  the 
courts.  Poor  people  must  have  their  courts  near  at 
hand: 

Good  statesmanship  will  avoid  the  creation  of  imperial 
States.  I  heard  it  said  during  the  discussion  last  year  that 
if  we  would  divide  Dakota  and  divide  other  Territories  the 
Senate  would  become  a  mob.  At  most  it  could  not  have 
more  than  one  hundred  members  if  we  admitted  all  the 
Territories,  dividing  Dakota,  and,  I  think,  splitting  up 
Texas  into  five  States  besides;  but  it  is  better  that  the 
Senate  should  be  so  enlarged,  that  it  should  represent  the 
popular  will  and  feel  the  popular  pulse,  than  that  a  State 
should  be  admitted  which  would  have  an  abnormally  large 


New  States  in  the  West  143 

representation  in  the  House  of  Representatives.  It  is 
to  the  danger,  it  is  to  the  disadvantage  of  smaller  States 
and  medium-sized  States  that  any  State  should  have  an 
abnormally  large  representation  in  the  House  of  Represen 
tatives. 

The  act  enabling  the  people  of  the  two  Dakotas, 
Montana,  and  Washington,  to  form  constitutions  and 
State  governments,  was  passed  in  the  next  session,  and 
was  approved  by  President  Cleveland  on  February 
22,  1889. 

In  the  first  session  of  the  Fifty-first  Congress  in  1890, 
Mr.  Platt  as  Chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Territories, 
secured  the  enactment  of  bills  admitting  to  statehood 
Idaho  and  Wyoming.  There  was  a  Republican  majority 
in  both  Senate  and  House,  and  the  opposition  to  these 
bills  was  perfunctory,  though,  in  the  case  of  Wyoming, 
there  was  a  question  as  to  the  advisability  of  admitting 
to  full  participation  in  the  privileges  of  statehood 
a  community  where  women  would  be  permitted  to 
vote  under  the  constitution.  To  this  Mr.  Platt  re 
sponded  that  while  he  had  never  been  an  advocate  of 
woman  suffrage,  he  would  not  keep  a  Territory  out  of 
the  Union  because  its  constitution  allowed  women  to 
vote,  nor  would  he  force  upon  a  Territory  any  restriction 
or  qualification  as  to  what  the  vote  should  be  in  that 
respect.  Both  the  Idaho  and  Wyoming  bills  were 
passed  and  the  two  new  States  were  admitted,  one  on 
July  3,  1890,  the  other  on  July  nth. 

It  was  six  years  before  the  admission  of  another 
State.  Utah  was  admitted  in  1896,  and  Oklahoma  in 
1907.  In  the  first  session  of  the  Fifty-second  Congress, 
in  1892,  the  Committee  on  Territories  reported  a  bill  for 
the  admission  of  New  Mexico.  Mr.  Platt  did  not  join 
in  the  report,  and  questioned  whether,  in  view  of 


i44  Orville  H.  Platt 

statistics  and  facts,  New  Mexico  was  entitled  to  ad 
mission.  When  the  attempt  was  made  ten  years  later 
to  admit  Arizona  and  New  Mexico,  with  Oklahoma  and 
the  Indian  Territory,  Mr.  Platt,  although  not  then  a 
member  of  the  Committee,  strongly  opposed  the  ad 
mission  of  the  four  new  States.  He  was  ready  to 
admit  Oklahoma  and  the  Indian  Territory  as  one  State, 
and  that  finally  came  about,  but  his  influence,  which 
was  very  powerful,  was  exerted  against  any  other  con 
clusion  than  this.  To  his  friend,  L.  F.  Parker  of 
St.  Louis,  who  favored  giving  the  Indian  Territory  a 
delegate  in  Congress,  he  wrote,  on  March  25,  1903  : 

There  is  much  in  what  you  say  in  your  letter  of  Novem 
ber  2oth,  but  I  do  not  feel  like  doing  anything  which  may 
seem  to  have  the  apparent  effect  of  looking  toward  state 
hood  for  the  Indian  Territory  alone.  I  have  pretty  decided 
notions  on  that  subject.  Oklahoma  and  the  Indian 
Territory  have,  of  course,  sufficient  population  for  statehood, 
when  compared  with  many  States  we  have  admitted,  but  I 
believe  it  is  best  for  the  country  and  best  for  both  Okla 
homa  and  the  Indian  Territory,  that  when  they  do  come  in, 
they  shall  come  as  one  State.  States  are  made  altogether 
too  easily  and  thoughtlessly  now.  I  do  not  know  that  the 
allowance  of  a  delegate  would  affect  the  matter,  but  Alaska 
is  asking  for  one,  as  well  as  the  Indian  Territory — both  are 
in  somewhat  unorganized  condition,  and  between  us,  I  do 
not  think  there  is  any  necessity  for  one  from  either.  I  do 
not  mean  by  this  to  say  that  I  would  oppose  it,  but  am 
merely  expressing  my  own  feeling  about  it. 

During  all  his  association  with  the  Committee  on 
Territories  and  the  Committee  on  Indian  Affairs,  Mr. 
Platt  scrupulously  refrained  from  interfering  in  the 
purely  local  questions  involved,  save  where  it  was 
necessary  in  the  enactment  of  legislation.  Above  all 


New  States  in  the  West  145 

he  kept  himself  aloof  from  the  scrambles  for  office. 
His  reply  in  1889  to  one  who  wrote  him  in  behalf 
of  an  applicant  for  the  governorship  of  .New  Mexico  is 
typical  of  his  attitude  in  all  such  things: 

I  have  felt  that  it  would  be  a  mistake  for  me  to  re 
commend  particular  persons  for  appointment  in  Territories 
— in  any  of  them.  By  reason  of  my  position  as  Chairman 
of  the  Senate  Committee  on  Territories,  and  the  very  severe 
struggle  to  get  the  four  Territories  admitted,  viz. :  Washing 
ton,  Montana,  and  the  two  Dakotas,  I  have  come  to  occupy 
a  position  where  my  endorsement  is  very  much  sought  by 
applicants  for  positions  in  those  Territories.  I  am  in  no  way 
qualified  to  recommend  the  persons  to  fill  the  offices,  and 
if  I  should  recommend  one,  I  would  displease  the  others. 
So  I  have  thought  that  the  best  interests  of  the  Territories 
required  that  I  should  not  make  recommendations.  I 
am  very  much  interested  in  having  President  Harrison 
adopt  the  policy  of  immediate  change  of  officers  and  make 
appointments  from  the  Territories  and  not  from  the  out 
side.  I  have  told  him  that  I  have  no  men  to  push,  but 
that  I  do  believe  that  the  interests  of  the  Republican  party 
require  immediate  action.  And  I  have  even  declined  to 
express  an  opinion  when  asked  by  him,  as  to  the  compara 
tive  merits  of  candidates — not  in  New  Mexico,  but  in  one 
of  the  other  Territories.  I  think  I  can  do  more  for  the 
Territories  in  that  position  than  to  try  to  get  this  or  that 
man  appointed,  and  there  is  no  middle  ground.  I  must 
either  make  recommendations  in  all  the  Territories  or  in 
none.  I  think  you  will  coincide  with  me  in  saying  this  is  the 
wisest  thing  to  do.  But  if  not,  I  have  already  taken  this 
position  with  the  President,  and  do  not  see  how  I  can 
change. 

His  service  with  the  Committee  on  Territories  lasted 
for  twelve  years, — from  1883  to  1895.  During  the  first 
four  years  Benjamin  Harrison  was  Chairman  of  the 


146  Orville  H.  Platt 

Committee  and  Platt  sat  next  to  him  at  the  table; 
during  the  six  years  from  1887  to  1893,  Platt  was 
Chairman  of  the  Committee;  from  1893  to  1895,  the 
Democrats  were  in  control.  The  work  which  he  did 
during  this  period  gave  him  great  satisfaction,  and  on 
the  rare  occasions  when  he  enumerated  his  achieve 
ments  in  legislation  he  always  laid  stress  upon  the  new 
States  he  had  a  hand  in  creating;  but  perhaps  the 
greatest  value  of  his  service  was  in  the  experience  it 
gave  him  with  the  practical  problems  of  territorial 
government  which  came  so  well  in  play  when  the  time 
arrived  to  consider  the  graver  questions  growing  out 
of  the  organization  of  strange  territory  through  the 
war  with  Spain. 


CHAPTER  XI 

THE  FOREIGN-BORN  AMERICAN 

Restriction  of  Immigration — Advocate  of  Reasonable  Legislation — 
His  Opinion  of  the  Adopted  Citizen. 

THE  preservation  of  the  quality  of  American  citizen 
ship  was  a  thing  which  all  his  life  appealed  power 
fully  to  this  typical  American  of  English  ancestry.  At 
the  same  time,  he  was  broad  enough  in  his  humanity  to 
understand  the  aspirations  of  the  alien  seeking  to  better 
his  condition  by  migrating  to  our  shores,  and  practical 
enough  to  recognize  the  economic  value  of  the  imple 
ment  thus  thrust  into  our  hands.  He  believed  in 
immigration  and  was  for  welcoming  every  worthy 
stranger  who  wandered  this  way  for  a  home.  It  is 
true  that  in  his  early  manhood  he  had  been  affiliated 
with  the  American  or  "  Know-Nothing  "  party  and  had 
served  as  Chairman  of  its  State  Committee,  but  this  was 
not  because  he  subscribed  to  the  party's  bigoted  anti- 
foreign  creed.  It  was  because  he  saw  in  its  organization 
the  most  effective  agency  then  at  hand  to  advance  the 
Anti-Slavery  cause.  As  time  went  by  and  he  saw 
the  deserted  homesteads  in  the  Litchfield  hills  gradu 
ally  renewing  their  life  through  the  influx  of  thrifty 
Swedes,  he  grew  to  appreciate  the  value  of  the  healthy 
blood  infused  into  the  veins  of  a  thinning  countryside, 
and  he  appreciated  also  the  importance  of  maintaining 
the  wholesomeness  of  the  inflowing  stream.  For  the 

147 


i48  Orville  H.  Platt 

French-Canadians  who  had  come  to  the  mill  towns  of  the 
Connecticut  valley  in  great  numbers,  he  had  a  high 
regard.  He  seized  more  than  one  occasion  in  the 
Senate  to  record  his  commendation  of  their  sterling 
qualities  : 

I  have  known  these  people  for  forty  years  in  the  city 
where  I  reside  [he  said  in  the  course  of  the  debate  on  the 
Wilson -Gorman  Tariff  bill  in  1894],  and  I  am  proud  to 
number  among  them  very  many  valued  acquaintances, 
social  acquaintances,  with  whom  I  am  as  glad  to  associate 
as  with  any  of  the  citizens  of  my  town.  They  are,  as  a  rule, 
intelligent,  industrious,  thrifty,  and  conservative ;  they  make 
good  citizens;  they  accumulate  property,  they  are  me 
chanics,  agriculturists,  and  merchants,  and  among  them 
are  many  scholars,  authors,  and  men  representing  the 
different  professions;  they  assimilate  with  our  native 
population ;  their  children  intermarry  with  ours ;  they  are 
quiet  and  unostentatious;  they  make  no  trouble,  and  after 
a  period  of  residence  here  they  can  scarcely  be  distinguished 
from  our  own  native  population. 

Their  children  attend  our  schools,  take  prizes  in  competi 
tion  with  the  children  of  the  old  inhabitants  of  Connecticut, 
and  in  no  respect  can  they  be  taunted  with  being  an  inferior 
or  undesirable  people.  Usually  they  accumulate  property, 
and  they  do  not  return  to  Canada  carrying  away  the  money 
which  they  have  earned  here.  They  do  not  supplant  our 
American  workman  by  accepting  lower  wages.  They 
work  for  the  same  wages  that  the  native  workman  receives ; 
they  work  beside  him  at  the  same  bench  or  on  the  same 
machine.  There  is  no  prejudice  against  them.  They  are 
a  church-going  and  a  religious  people,  moral  as  well  as 
industrious.  They  do  not  appear  in  our  police  courts, 
but  they  do  take  part,  as  they  should,  in  our  town  meetings. 

But  he  was  not  blind  to  the  fact  that  all  immigrants 
were  not  of  the  character  of  the  Swedes  and  French- 


The  Foreign-Born  American          149 

Canadians  who  settled  in  his  own  State,  and  throughout 
his  service  in  the  Senate  he  invariably  supported  meas 
ures  to  exclude  the  undesirable. 

In  the  second  session  of  the  Forty-eighth  Congress  in 
1884,  a  law  was  enacted  to  prohibit  the  importation 
and  migration  of  foreigners  and  aliens  under  contract 
or  agreement  to  perform  labor  in  the  United  States, 
its  Territories,  and  the  District  of  Columbia.  Mr.  Platt 
not  only  voted  for  it  but  spoke  for  it: 

It  is  a  bill  [he  said]  which  proposes  to  declare,  as  I 
understand,  two  things,  and  therefore  I  am  in  favor  of  it: 
First,  that  the  policy  of  this  Government  is  to  protect  its 
laboring  men,  its  workers,  to  protect  them  to  the  extent 
that  they  shall  be  elevated  rather  than  degraded,  that  they 
shall  be  educated  rather  than  made  ignorant,  that  they 
shall  be  honored  rather  than  despised;  and  second,  I 
understand  the  principle  of  this  bill  to  be  that  labor  in  this 
country  belongs  of  right  to  the  laborers  who  are  now  resi 
dent  here,  and  to  such  other  laborers  as  shall  voluntarily 
come  here  to  join  those  resident  here  in  the  performance 
of  that  labor,  and  I  have  no  hesitation  in  saying  that  a  prac 
tice  which  contradicts  and  violates  these  principles  is  a 
crime  against  the  Republic,  a  crime  against  its  social  order, 
and  a  crime  against  its  system  of  government. 

It  is  impossible  to  bring  foreign  laborers  here  under 
contract  without  assailing  all  these  principles  which  I  have 
been  enunciating.  I  am  opposed  to  importing  laborers  as 
we  import  horses  and  cattle.  I  am  opposed  to  what  may 
be  called  involuntary  immigration  into  this  country.  I 
am  not  opposed  to  voluntary  immigration.  I  regard 
voluntary  immigration  as  one  of  the  chief  sources  of  our 
strength,  as  a  factor  which  has  developed  and  is  further 
to  develop  the  grandest  civilization  that  this  continent  or 
the  world  has  ever  known,  and  to  make  our  own  the  most 
prosperous,  the  most  powerful,  and  the  most  beneficent  of 


150  Orville  H.  Platt 

all  the  nations  of  the  earth.  I  believe  that  the  admixture 
with  our  native  races  of  those  who  come  here  imbued  with 
the  principles  of  this  Government,  seeking  to  better  their 
condition,  honestly  desiring  to  work  in  this  land  of  freedom, 
tends  to  build  us  up  as  a  people  and  to  ennoble  all  our 
citizens. 

I  have  never  been  in  favor  of  involuntary  immigration. 
I  voted  against  the  Chinese  bill,  not  because  I  was  in  favor 
of  Chinamen  being  brought  here  under  contract  for  labor, 
but  simply  because  I  thought  that  there  were  in  that  bill 
sections  and  clauses  which  prohibited  voluntary  immigra 
tion  into  this  country,  which  shut  out  the  man  who  desired 
of  his  own  accord,  of  his  own  free  will,  to  come  here  and 
become  a  part  of  us ;  because  men  were  shut  out  from  this 
country  by  that  bill,  as  I  understood  it,  simply  on  account 
of  their  being  laborers  who  wanted  to  labor  in  this  country. 
I  will  go  as  far  as  any  other  man  to  prohibit  bringing 
contract  labor  here,  whether  it  be  Chinese,  or  Italian,  or 
Hungarian,  or  English,  or  French,  or  Irish. 

It  is  that  principle  against  which  I  contend,  and  in  so 
doing  I  recognize  and  uphold  the  right  of  any  human  being 
on  this  globe  who  himself,  of  his  own  motive,  of  his  own 
desire,  his  own  free  will,  wishes  to  come  here  and  become 
part  of  us,  and  honestly  partake  of  the  benefits  of  labor  in 
this  country,  to  come  without  hindrance  or  restriction. 
My  doctrine  is  that  no  importation  of  laborers  to  lower  the 
rate  of  American  wages  should  be  permitted,  and  no  volun 
tary  immigration  of  honest  laborers  should  be  prevented. 

He  supported  the  bill  which  became  a  law  on  March 
3,  1891,  amending  and  systematizing  the  immigra 
tion  laws,  and  he  voted  for  the  bill  which  was  vetoed 
by  President  Cleveland  on  March  2,  1897,  establishing 
an  educational  test.  Beyond  those  regulations  he  did 
not  see  how  it  was  possible  to  restrict  immigration  with 
out  excluding  people  who  ought  not  to  be  excluded. 
During  the  consideration  of  the  Immigration  bill  which 


The  Foreign-Born  American          151 

became  a  law  on  March  4,  1903,  he  was  instrumental 
in  securing  an  amendment,  the  absence  of  which  might 
have  proved  embarrassing  to  the  enforcement  of  the 
law,  when  he  caused  the  word  ''immigrant"  to  be 
stricken  out  after  the  word  "alien."  Had  the  original 
expression  been  retained,  it  would  have  been  possible 
for  any  alien  coming  to  the  United  States  to  escape  the 
provisions  of  the  law  by  declaring  his  intention  to  return 
to  his  own  country. 

His  creed  with  regard  to  immigration  he  expounded 
in  the  course  of  the  speech  which  he  made  during  the 
debate  on  the  Chinese  Exclusion  bill,  September  7,  1888 : 

I  hold  that  a  citizen  of  any  country  on  the  face  of  this 
earth  has  a  right  to  leave  that  country  and  to  transfer  his 
allegiance  to  another  country  with  the  consent  of  the 
Government  to  which  he  endeavors  to  transfer  his  allegiance. 
That  right,  I  think,  is  too  sacred  in  American  history  to  be 
denied  or  impeached  or  in  any  way  invaded. 

I  hold  just  as  firmly  to  our  right  not  to  receive  a  man 
who  may  thus  expatriate  himself  and  desire  to  come  to 
this  country  as  I  do  to  his  right  to  come  with  our  consent. 
I  hold  that  we  have  a  right  to  so  regulate,  restrain,  restrict, 
or  prohibit  immigration  into  this  country,  as  that  our  own 
country  and  our  own  people  shall  not  suffer  by  that  immi 
gration,  as  that  the  character  of  our  own  people  shall  not 
be  in  any  sense  degraded  or  suffer  by  such  immigration.  I 
hold  that  we  ought  to  receive  any  person  who  thus  desires 
to  leave  a  foreign  country  and  come  to  our  shores  and  who 
can  comply  with  certain  conditions  which  are  necessary 
to  be  complied  with  in  order  that  our  civilization,  our  labor, 
and  the  character  of  our  people  shall  be  in  no  sense  lessened, 
interfered  with,  or  degraded. 

If,  then,  a  man  coming  from  another  country  is  honest, 
is  reputable,  is  able  to  take  care  of  himself,  is  healthy,  is 
the  head  of  a  family,  is  of  capacity  to  understand  our 


152  Orville  H.  Platt 

system  of  government,  and  is  sincerely  desirous  of  casting 
in  his  lot  with  us  and  ultimately  becoming  a  citizen  of  this 
Government,  I  hold  we  have  no  right  to  exclude  him.  But 
if  on  the  other  hand  that  person  belongs  to  the  criminal, 
or  to  the  pauper,  or  the  diseased  or  vicious  class,  we  ought 
to  exclude  him.  We  have  no  room  here  for  that  class  of 
immigrants.  We  have  no  room  for  criminals,  paupers, 
diseased,  vicious  people  in  all  our  wide  domain.  We  ought 
also  to  exclude  people  who  have  no  sympathy  with  us 
or  with  our  form  of  government  or  with  our  institutions. 

The  very  clause  in  our  statute  of  naturalization  is  a  guide 
to  us  in  this  respect.  Before  an  alien  can  become  a  natural 
ized  citizen  he  must  make  it  appear  to  the  satisfaction  of 
the  court  admitting  him  to  citizenship  that  during  his 
residence  in  the  United  States  "he  has  behaved  as  a  man 
of  good  moral  character,  is  attached  to  the  principles  of 
the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  and  well  disposed  to 
the  good  order  and  happiness  of  the  same. "  I  would  not 
admit  to  these  shores,  if  I  could  apply  the  test,  a  single 
individual  who  had  not  capacity  enough  to  understand 
something  of  our  system  of  government,  and  to  have  an  as 
piration  for  the  liberty  and  independence  and  the  dignity 
which  a  man  may  acquire  and  achieve  under  our  system  of 
government.  No  anarchists,  no  communists,  no  persons, 
from  wherever  they  may  come,  who  do  not  come  here 
imbued  with  the  principles  first  laid  down,  in  the  history 
of  the  world,  in  that  glorious  Declaration  of  Independence, 
should  be  permitted  to  come,  if  I  could  apply  the  individual 
test  which  would  keep  them  away. 


CHAPTER  XII 

FAIR  PLAY  TOWARDS  CHINA 

Chinese  Exclusion — Opposes  Act  of  1882 — Unsuccessful  Attempt 

to  Amend  Geary  Act — Legislation  of   1888 — Prevents 

Drastic  Legislation  in  1902  and  1904. 

DENNIS  KEARNY,  the  sand  lots  agitator  of  San 
Francisco,  was  in  the  midst  of  his  crusade  against 
the  Chinese,  at  the  time  Mr.  Platt  entered  the  Senate. 
The  anti-Chinese  cry  in  California  had  been  growing  in 
volume  for  a  long  time.  In  1876,  it  had  reached  such 
proportions  that  both  political  parties  inserted  in  their 
platforms  planks  regarding  it;  the  Democrats  demand 
ing  legislation  to  prevent  further  Mongolian  immigra 
tion,  the  Republicans  calling  upon  Congress  to  investi 
gate  the  effects  of  the  immigration  and  importation  of 
Mongolians  upon  the  moral  and  material  interests  of 
the  country.  In  1878,  Congress  had  passed  an  act 
"to  restrict  the  immigration  of  Chinese  into  the  United 
States,"  which  President  Hayes  had  vetoed,  on  the 
ground  that  the  legislation  was  in  violation  of  the 
existing  treaty  negotiated  in  1868  by  Mr.  Seward  and 
Mr.  Burlingame.  The  House  declined  to  pass  the  bill 
over  the  veto.  President  Hayes  thereupon  proceeded 
to  negotiate  two  treaties  with  China — one  relating  to 
commercial  intercourse,  the  other  relieving  the  United 
States  from  the  provisions  of  the  Burlingame  treaty  and 
permitting  the  exclusion  of  Chinese  laborers.  This 
treaty,  signed  in  1880,  was  ratified  July  19,  1881,  and  at 

153 


154  Orville  H.  Platt 

the  next  session  of  Congress  a  bill  was  introduced  by 
Senator  Miller  of  California,  the  avowed  object  of  which 
was  "to  enforce  treaty  stipulations  relating  to  the 
Chinese."  The  bill  forbade  the  coming  of  Chinese 
into  the  United  States  for  a  period  of  twenty  years,  and 
was  drastic  in  its  provisions.  Mr.  Platt  could  not 
bring  himself  to  vote  for  it.  He  believed  it  violated  the 
spirit  of  the  treaty  as  well  as  the  principles  of  natural 
rights  and  justice.  On  March  8,  1882,  he  delivered  a 
speech  in  opposition  to  the  measure,  which  was  em 
phatic  and  comprehensive.  "To  prevent  possible 
damage  or  alleviate  a  real  misfortune,"  he  said,  "I 
cannot  consent  to  the  infraction  even  of  the  spirit  of  a 
treaty,  while  professing  to  be  bound  by  it."  He  re 
minded  the  Senate  that  a  treaty  was  "a  contract  be 
tween  nations"  and  should  be  kept  like  every  other 
contract,  in  the  spirit  in  which  it  was  made: 

We  made  this  contract  which  we  call  a  treaty  with  the 
Chinese  Government,  and  we  must  keep  it.  We  must  keep  it 
or  stand  forever  disgraced  in  the  eyes  of  the  world.  There 
is  no  way  in  which  an  individual  can  so  soon  and  so  thor 
oughly  forfeit  the  respect  of  the  community  in  which  he 
lives  as  to  be  sharp  in  making  a  contract  and  sharp  in 
taking  an  unfair  advantage  under  the  contract  which  the 
other  contracting  party  never  expected  that  he  would 
take.  There  is  no  way  in  which  a  nation  can  so  surely 
forfeit  the  respect  of  all  other  nations  as  to  make  that  con 
tract  called  a  treaty  in  shrewdness,  and  then  as  shrewdly 
take  advantage  of  the  technical  terms  of  that  treaty  to 
accomplish  what  the  other  contracting  party  never  intended 
should  be  accomplished. 

But  aside  from  the  fact  that  the  bill  was  in  violation 
of  the  treaty,  Mr.  Platt  opposed  it  because : 

The   true   intent   and   meaning  of  it  is  to  declare   that 


Fair  Play  Towards  China  155 

henceforth,  excepting  only  the  Chinese  now  here,  and  the 
colored  people  now  here,  no  man  shall  work  in  the  United 
States  except  he  be  a  white  man. 

He  could  not  give  his  adherence  to  such  a  principle : 

In  the  right  to  work  honestly,  the  Chinaman  is  your 
equal  and  my  equal  and  the  equal  of  every  living  man,  and 
I  will  never  consent  to  the  passage  of  any  bill  which  con 
travenes  that  principle.  Do  not  misunderstand  me.  I 
do  not  say  the  Chinaman  is  the  equal  of  the  Anglo-Saxon 
socially  or  intellectually.  What  I  do  say  is  that,  other 
conditions  being  equal,  he  has  the  same  right  to  come  to 
this  country  and  work  that  any  white  foreigner  has. 

Mr.  President,  it  will  not  do  to  put  this  legislation  on 
that  ground.  It  will  not  do  to  say  that  a  white  man  who 
has  all  the  characteristics  and  habits  of  a  Chinaman  and 
who  will  work  as  cheap  as  a  Chinaman  may  co.ne  and  labor 
here  and  a  Chinaman  may  not,  because,  forsooth,  he  is  a 
Mongolian.  It  will  not  do  to  invite  white  men  to  come 
and  labor,  no  matter  how  cheap  they  may  labor,  and  forbid 
a  Chinaman  to  come  and  labor  at  the  same  wages.  You 
must  put  this  legislation  on  some  other  ground  than  the 
ground  of  race  or  color. 

Having  given  the  reasons  for  his  opposition  to  the 
bill,  Mr.  Platt  went  on  to  suggest  certain  conditions 
under  which  he  could  vote  for  legislation  on  the  subject : 

I  would  vote  for  a  bill  which  did  not  improperly  regulate 
or  limit,  or  unreasonably  suspend  the  immigration  of 
Chinese  laborers.  I  would  vote  for  a  bill  which  should 
prevent  them  coming  to  this  country  in  such  numbers  as  to 
endanger  our  political  and  social  institutions.  I  would 
vote  for  a  bill  which  would  prevent  their  coming  here  as 
laborers  in  such  numbers  as  to  ruin  labor.  I  would  vote 
for  a  bill  which  should  prevent  their  coming  here,  if  they 


156  Orville  H.  Platt 

degrade  labor  or  make  it  dishonorable.  But  I  cannot 
vote  for  a  bill  which  has  for  its  only  object,  for  its  only 
aim  and  result,  the  extirpation  and  the  exclusion  of  the 
Chinaman  from  this  country.  ...  I  am  willing,  and  I  put 
on  record  my  willingness,  to  vote  for  any  law  we  may 
properly  pass,  any  law  we  can  pass  without  violation  of 
treaty  obligations,  to  the  end  that  the  labor  market  of  this 
country  shall  not  be  over-supplied  by  immigration  from 
any  quarter;  that  there  shall  be  no  undue  and  ruinous 
competition  in  labor;  that  honest  labor  shall  not  be  dis 
honored  or  degraded  anywhere ;  that  the  standard  of  labor 
shall  be  fairly  remunerative  everywhere ;  that  the  man  who 
is  willing  to  do  honest  work  with  hand  or  brain,  or  both, 
shall  receive  wages  enough  to  enable  him  to  live  respectably, 
to  educate  his  children,  and  respect  himself. 

But  the  tide  of  sentiment  was  too  strong.  The 
Senate  voted  down  an  amendment  reducing  the  period 
of  exclusion  from  twenty  years  to  ten,  and  on  March 
9,  1882,  passed  the  bill  in  all  its  criminal  enormity,  by 
a  vote  of  29  to  15.  Mr.  Platt  had  a  general  pair  with 
Mr.  Johnston  of  Virginia,  and  so  could  not  be  recorded, 
but  in  announcing  his  pair,  he  said :  "  I  regret  very  much 
that  I  am  not  permitted,  by  reason  of  the  pair,  to  vote 
against  the  bill."  He  had  respectable  company  in  the 
minority:  Aldrich,  Allison,  David  Davis,  Dawes, 
Edmunds,  Frye,  Hoar,  Ingalls,  and  Morrill,  among 
others. 

The  bill  passed  the  House  a  little  later,  and  President 
Arthur  vetoed  it,  in  his  message  of  April  4th,  on  the 
ground  that  both  good  faith  and  good  policy  forbade 
the  suspension  of  Chinese  immigration  for  so  long  a 
period  as  twenty  years.  The  Senate  refused  to  pass  the 
bill  over  the  veto.  A  few  weeks  later,  a  bill  was  passed 
providing  for  suspension  for  ten  years,  instead  of  twenty, 


Fair  Play  Towards  China  157 

and  making  other  modifications.  Mr.  Platt  was  one 
of  fifteen  Senators  to  vote  against  this  bill,  but  it  was 
signed  by  the  President  on  May  6,  1882. 

For  six  years  there  was  comparative  quiet  in  Wash 
ington,  so  far  as  anti-Chinese  legislation  was  concerned, 
although  the  feeling  in  the  West  became  more  and  more 
intense.  In  the  Cleveland  administration  a  treaty  was 
negotiated  with  China,  under  which  the  Chinese  Govern 
ment  was  to  prohibit  the  emigration  of  laborers,  and 
the  United  States  was  to  protect  from  violence  those 
already  in  this  country.  While  this  treaty  was  still 
pending,  one  of  the  most  disgraceful  episodes  of  Ameri 
can  politics  was  written  into  the  records  of  Congress. 
Mr.  Cleveland  had  been  renominated  and  the  Presiden 
tial  campaign  was  on.  William  L.  Scott  of  Pennsyl 
vania,  a  leading  member  of  the  House,  was  also  a 
leading  member  of  the  Executive  Committee  of  the 
Democratic  National  Committee.  He  was  regarded  as 
President  Cleveland's  spokesman  in  Congress.  On  Mon 
day,  September  3,  1888,  without  previous  notice,  an 
extraordinary  bill  was  brought  into  the  House  by  Mr. 
Scott,  the  President's  friend,  amending  the  Act  of  1882, 
by  striking  out  all  permission  for  a  Chinese  to  return  to 
this  country  for  any  purpose,  after  having  once  left  it, 
and  declaring  all  return  certificates  void — in  fact,  barring 
the  United  States  to  any  Chinese  workman  once  out 
side  its  boundaries.  The  bill,  which  was  thought  to 
have  been  prepared  at  the  White  House,  was  rushed 
through  the  House  that  Monday  morning  within  half 
an  hour  of  its  introduction.  It  was  a  spectacular 
political  trick,  so  timed  that  neither  party  in  Congress 
could  afford  to  oppose  it  in  the  face  of  a  Presidential 
election.  Mr.  Platt  voted  for  the  bill  under  protest, 
and  voiced  his  protest  in  the  Senate: 


158  Orville  H.  Platt 

If  a  vote  is  now  pressed  upon  this  bill  I  shall  vote  for  it, 
and  I  desire  to  state  the  reasons,  and  I  desire  also  to  state 
some  reasons  why  I  shall  do  it  under  protest,  for  I  do  not 
intend  that  any  action  of  mine  shall  be  misunderstood  or 
misrepresented. 

I  do  not  like  the  way  this  bill  has  come  before  Congress, 
and  I  want  to  say  so  as  emphatically  as  I  know  how.  In 
May  last  the  Senate  of  the  United  States  advised  and  con 
sented  to  a  treaty  which  had  been  negotiated  with  China 
and  communicated  to  the  Senate  by  the  President.  We 
were  told  by  those  representing  the  Pacific  Coast,  and  we 
have  heard  it  over  and  over  again,  that  the  treaty  as  it 
came  to  the  Senate  was  not  satisfactory  and  would  not  ac 
complish  the  object  in  view,  namely,  the  exclusion  of 
Chinese  laborers  from  this  country.  Being  told  that,  the 
Senate  amended  the  treaty  in  a  way  which  was  proposed  by 
the  representatives  of  the  Pacific  Coast  and  in  a  manner 
which  they  told  us  would  be  entirely  satisfactory  and  would 
have  the  effect  of  preventing  Chinese  laborers  from  coming 
to  this  country  in  competition  with  our  home  labor.  The 
treaty  was  so  amended  and  passed  the. Senate.  Follow 
ing  that  treaty  the  Senate  passed  a  bill  on  the  8th  of 
August,  1888,  to  carry  into  effect  the  provisions  of  that 
treaty  when  ratifications  should  be  exchanged — a  bill  which 
I  think  received  the  unanimous  support  of  the  Senate,  a  bill 
which  I  approved  and  which  I  still  approve.  .  .  .  The 
treaty  has  been  submitted  to  the  Chinese  authorities  for 
the  exchange  of  ratifications.  The  bill,  after  having  passed 
the  Senate,  went  to  the  House  of  Representatives,  was  con 
curred  in  by  the  House,  and  on  the  first  day  of  September, 
1888,  was  taken  to  the  President  of  the  United  States  for 
his  approval,  and  remains  before  him  at  the  present  time. 
This  was  last  Saturday.  With  that  bill,  which,  if  the  treaty 
is  to  be  ratified  by  the  Chinese  Government,  goes  as  far 
as  any  human  being  in  the  United  States  has  asked  Congress 
to  go  in  the  exclusion  of  Chinese  laborers — with  that  bill 
passed  by  both  Houses,  now  in  the  hands  of  the  President 


Fair  Play  Towards  China  159 

of  the  United  States  for  approval  or  rejection,  there  comes 
here  another  act,  based  upon  the  assumption  that  this 
treaty  is  not  to  be  ratified.  As  I  say,  the  bill  passed  by 
both  Houses  of  Congress  was  delivered  to  the  President 
of  the  United  States  last  Saturday,  the  first  day  of  Septem 
ber.  On  last  Monday,  the  third  day  of  September,  there 
came  to  us  from  the  House  of  Representatives  the  bill  now 
under  consideration. 

If,  as  every  Senator  here  thinks,  if,  as  the  whole  country 
believes,  the  bill  under  consideration  emanated  from  the 
Executive  Department,  and  was  started  in  hot  haste  im 
mediately  after  the  laying  before  the  President  of  the  United 
States  of  a  bill  passed  by  Congress  upon  the  subject,  it 
seems  to  me  to  be  an  Executive  interference  with  the  legis 
lative  branch  of  the  Government,  and  I  am  bound  in  my 
character  as  a  Senator  to  make  that  remark.  .  .  . 

I  can  not  say  that  this  bill  is  written  upon  the  paper  of 
the  Executive  Department.  I  know  it  is  generally  be 
lieved  in  both  Houses  of  this  Congress  that  it  is.  I  can 
not  say  that  the  most  potential  man  in  the  Democratic 
National  Committee  in  the  management  of  this  campaign 
came  from  the  White  House  to  the  Capitol  with  this  bill; 
but  it  is  generally  believed  in  this  chamber  and  throughout 
the  Union.  If  there  has  been  no  official  notice  or  unofficial 
intimation  that  this  treaty  has  been  rejected  or  is  to  be 
rejected  by  the  Chinese  Government,  why  this  hot  haste  to 
override  the  act  now  lying  before  the  Executive  for  his 
approval,  and  to  pass  this  bill,  which  under  such  circum 
stances  would  be  a  direct  insult  to  a  nation  with  whom  at 
least  we  are  desirous  of  continuing  friendly  commercial 
relations?  Is  this  a  vote-catching  performance?  Has  it 
come  to  this  that  public  office  is  to  be  prostituted  for 
Democratic  electioneering  purposes?  And  if  not,  what 
other  reason  is  there  for  thrusting  in  this  untimely  way 
this  bill  upon  the  attention  of  Congress?  .  .  . 

This  bill  being  here,  being  bound  as  a  Senator,  in  spite 
of  all  the  circumstances  which  point  to  other  conclusions, 


160  Orville  H.  Platt 

to  assume  that  the  Executive  and  the  State  Department  and 
the  Democratic  National  Committee  have  some  knowledge 
which  has  not  been  communicated  to  us,  that  this  treaty 
is  not  to  be  ratified,  I  am  going  to  vote  for  the  bill,  and 
I  am  going  to  do  so  because  I  am  heartily  and  sincerely  in 
favor  of  prohibiting  and  preventing  any  immigration  into 
this  country  of  a  character  which  we  ought  not  to  receive. 
...  I  put  my  vote  for  this  bill  solely  on  the  ground 
that  I  can  not  assume  that  there  is  no  necessity  for  it.  If  the 
treaty  which  we  agreed  to  here  is  to  be  ratified  by  the 
Chinese  Government,  and  if  the  bill  which  we  have  already 
passed  to  carry  the  treaty  into  effect  is  to  be  approved  by 
the  President  of  the  United  States,  I  can  not  see  the  neces 
sity  for  this  bill.  But  I  will  not,  as  a  Senator,  assume  that 
this  bill  has  no  necessity  behind  it,  and  that  it  is  simply  and 
purely  an  electioneering  trick,  a  performance  on  the  part 
of  the  Democratic  party  and  its  high  officials  to  catch  votes 
in  certain  quarters  of  the  United  States. 

Only  three  members  of  the  Senate,  Hoar  of  Massa 
chusetts,  Brown  of  Georgia,  and  Wilson  of  Iowa,  voted 
against  the  bill,  and  many  of  those  who  voted  for  it 
under  the  stress  of  what  was  represented  by  the  ad 
ministration  spokesmen  to  be  a  great  emergency,  lived 
to  regret  their  record.  One  of  these  was  Mr.  Platt, 
who  later  took  advantage  of  the  opportunity  to  make 
amends. 

In  1 89 2,  when  the  ten  years'  period  specified  in  the 
Act  of  1882  was  approaching  an  end,  Mr.  Geary  of  Cali 
fornia  presented  in  the  House  a  bill  to  prohibit  abso 
lutely  the  coming  of  Chinese  persons  into  the  United 
States.  The  bill,  having  passed  the  House,  came  up 
for  action  in  the  Senate,  April  25,  1892.  Mr.  Platt 
offered  an  amendment,  providing  that  the  Act  of 
October  i,  1888,  should  be  excepted  from  the  laws 
then  in  force,  prohibiting  and  regulating  Chinese  im- 


Fair  Play  Towards  China  161 

migration,  which  should  be  "continued  in  force  for  a 
period  of  ten  years  from  the  passage  of  this  act." 

The  Scott  law  had  met  with  remonstrance  from  the 
Chinese  Government,  as  in  contravention  of  the  treaty 
of  1880,  and  strong  representations  against  it  had  been 
made  to  our  Government,  which  persistently  ignored 
them.  Mr.  Platt  declared  that  he  could  not  vote  for 
the  bill  without  his  amendment,  and  explained  that  he 
had  voted  for  the  Scott  bill  under  protest.  His  amend 
ment  was  rejected  by  a  vote  of  eight  to  forty-five,  and 
the  bill  was  passed  without  a  roll-call. 

At  the  end  of  a  second  ten-year  period,  in  1902,  Mr. 
Platt  again  had  an  opportunity  to  make  an  impress  on 
Chinese  legislation.  A  convention  with  China  of  Octo 
ber  8,  1894,  had  restored  the  conditions  of  return  to 
the  earlier  status.  In  1902,  a  bill  passed  the  House  to 
prohibit  the  coming  into,  and  to  regulate  the  residence 
within,  the  United  States,  of  Chinese  and  persons  of 
Chinese  descent.  It  was  a  long  bill,  putting  into  law 
all  Treasury  regulations  and  drastic  provisions  with 
regard  to  the  way  the  law  should  be  administered. 
When  the  bill  came  to  the  Senate,  it  gave  rise  to  long 
debate  and  grave  differences.  The  bill  was  pending 
for  months.  Mr.  Platt  finally  solved  the  difficulties  by 
presenting  a  substitute  for  the  bill,  which,  with  some 
modifications,  was  accepted  by  Congress.  The  effect 
was  to  continue  all  laws  then  in  force,  with  a  provision 
that  the  laws  were  "re-enacted,  extended,  and  con 
tinued,  so  far  as  the  same  are  not  inconsistent  with 
treaty  obligations." 

In  January,  1904,  the  Chinese  Government  gave  notice 
of  the  termination  on  December  ;th,  of  the  treaty  of 
1894,  not  because  she  wished  to  secure  admission  for 
her  laborers  into  the  United  States,  but  because  she 


162  Orville  H.  Platt 

wished  to  make  a  new  treaty  which  should  define 
more  specifically  the  word  "laborers"  and  thus  accord 
to  the  higher  classes  the  privilege  of  coming  into  the 
United  States.  Mr.  Patterson  of  Colorado  introduced 
a  bill  with  the  avowed  object  of  meeting  the  situation 
thus  created.  The  bill  was  complicated,  technical, 
and  stringent.  Its  effect  would  have  been  to  exclude 
bankers,  commercial  brokers,  and  all  persons  of  the 
higher  classes,  as  well  as  laborers;  to  give  to  immigra 
tion  officers  additional  means  to  harass  the  Chinese, 
and  still  further  to  widen  the  breach  between  China  and 
the  United  States.  For  one  thing,  it  provided  that  the 
words  "Chinese  person  "  or '  'persons  of  Chinese  descent ' ' 
should  be  construed  to  mean  any  person  descended 
from  an  ancestor  of  the  Mongolian  race,  "which  ances 
tor  is  now,  or  was  at  any  time  subsequent  to  the  year 
1800,  a  subject  of  the  Emperor  of  China." 

Mr.  Platt  took  the  lead  in  opposing  the  bill.  He 
pointed  out  that  it  would  exclude  "a  great  many 
Japanese,  all  Koreans,  a  very  large  proportion  of 
Filipinos,"  for  they  had  Mongolian  ancestors  who  were 
subjects  of  the  Emperor  of  China  within  the  last  one 
hundred  years: 

If  they  have  one  particle  of  Chinese  blood  from  an  ances 
tor  of  no  years  ago,  they  are  to  be  excluded  on  the  state 
ment  of  the  inspector  that  he  believes  they  had  such  an 
ancestor,  unless  right  then  and  there  they  can  prove  the 
contrary. 

Mr.  Platt  dissected  the  bill  section  by  section.  He 
was  in  constant  communication  with  the  White  House, 
restraining  the  President,  who  had  it  in  mind  to  send  a 
special  message  to  Congress,  and  keeping  him  advised 
as  to  developments  in  the  Senate.  The  bill  failed  to 


Fair  Play  Towards  China  163 

become  a  law,  and  Mr.  Plata's  part  in  chloroforming  it 
was  generously  recognized.  Among  the  letters  of 
approval,  he  had  this  from  a  former  Secretary  of  State: 

I  congratulate  you  and  the  country  on  your  effective 
effort  respecting  the  Chinese  Exclusion  amendment.  You 
have  saved  us  from  some  very  discreditable  legislation. 


CHAPTER  XIII 

SOUND    FINANCE 

First    Essays    in     Finance — Refunding     Bill    of    1881 — Speech    of 
February  i;th — Proposes  Abolition  of  Tax  on  Bank  Circulation. 

FINANCIAL  questions  are  proverbially  among  the 
most  troublesome  topics  which  come  before 
Congress.  They  lead  to  bitter  differences  of  opinion, 
to  unreasoning  debate,  to  sectional  and  class  hatred. 
Beyond  all  other  subjects  of  legislation,  those  affecting 
the  coinage,  banking,  loans,  and  currency  should  be 
religiously  divorced  from  politics,  yet  they  can  gen 
erally  be  depended  upon  to  excite  political  feeling  and 
accentuate  party  alignments,  so  that  it  is  impossible 
to  consider  them  in  accordance  with  simple  business 
principles,  to  say  nothing  of  recognized  principles  of 
finance.  There  have  been  few  questions  about  which 
charlatans  have  so  freely  had  their  say  or  about  which 
men  conspicuously  lacking  in  the  qualities  which  in 
spire  confidence  have  presumed  so  cheerfully  to  meddle 
with  the  operations  of  a  complex  governmental  machine. 
Not  only  does  public  finance  have  a  curious  fascination 
for  theorists  and  those  with  badly  balanced  minds, 
but  it  too  often  weaves  a  spell  on  public  men  devoted 
to  its  study,  deluding  them  with  some  fantastic  scheme 
impossible  to  execute,  even  though  it  were  to  take  the 
place  of  the  admittedly  imperfect  system  now  in  force. 
The  wonder  is  that  on  the  whole,  through  years  of 

164 


Sound  Finance  165 

turmoil,  compromise,  and  blind  experiment,  the  gov 
ernment  has  waxed  strong  financially,  and  that  a 
system  which,  like  Topsy,  has  "just  growed, "  should 
have  so  many  merits  and  so  few  defects.  That  chaos 
has  not  sprung  from  ceaseless  agitation  and  the  pro 
mulgation  of  queer  ideas  is  due  in  no  small  measure 
to  the  influence  of  men  of  common  sense  like  Platt, 
who,  while  pretending  to  no  mastery  of  the  theories 
of  finance,  have  kept  more  eager  spirits  from  plunging 
into  rash  extremes.  Platt  never  claimed  to  be  a 
financier,  and  he  was  quite  content  to  leave  to  others 
the  authoritative  exposition  of  monetary  principles. 
It  was  many  years  before  he  attained  a  position  on 
the  Finance  Committee,  yet  it  may  be  doubted  whether 
the  judgment  of  any  other  member  of  the  Senate  went 
farther  on  the  subjects  with  which  that  Committee 
has  to  deal.  "  It  is  not  more  money  we  need, "  he 
wrote  once,  when  the  question  of  an  elastic  currency 
was  under  discussion,  "  it  is  more  sense  about  money,  " 1 
and  that  remark  illustrates  the  way  in  which  he  always 
approached  the  subject. 

In  concluding  the  first  long  speech  he  ever  made  in 
the  Senate,  he  thus  expressed  his  modest  judgment  of 
his  own  attainments : 

I  have  ventured  to  make  these  observations  with  great 
diffidence  in  the  presence  and  hearing  of  Senators  who,  from 
study  and  long  observation  and  experience,  are  so  much 
better  qualified  to  discuss  this  subject  than  I  am.  I  do  not 
pretend  to  be  a  financier,  but  I  have  thought  that  the  sug 
gestions  which  I  have  tried  to  make,  some  of  them  at  least, 
might  claim  the  merit  of  being  in  accordance  with  common 
sense;  and,  if  so,  what  I  have  said  will  not  be  an  entirely 
unworthy  contribution  to  this  discussion. 

i  Letter  to  John  H.  Flagg,  August,  1903. 


1 66  Orville  H.  Platt 

This  was  his  habit — to  appeal  to  the  every-day, 
experience  of  the  average  man.  He  made  no  pretence 
to  expert  knowledge.  So  far  as  he  was  able,  he  applied 
the  ordinary  rules  of  private  business  to  the  considera 
tion  of  public  affairs.  He  had  always  been  a  "  sound- 
money"  man,  and  it  happened  that  his  first  serious 
discussion  of  an  important  measure  helped  to  fix  his 
place  in  the  Senate  as  a  pillar  of  conservative  finance. 

In  the  first  session  of  the  Forty-sixth  Congress,  in 
1880,  Fernando  Wood,  from  the  Committee  on  Ways 
and  Means,  of  which  he  was  Chairman,  had  reported 
to  the  House  a  bill  "  To  facilitate  the  refunding  of  the 
national  debt. "  As  originally  reported,  it  provided 
that,  in  lieu  of  the  bonds  authorized  by  the  refunding 
act  of  July  14,  1870,  bearing  5,  4^,  and  4  per  cent, 
interest,  bonds  bearing  interest  at  the  rate  of  3!  per 
cent.,  to  the  amount  of  $500,000,000,  redeemable  at  the 
pleasure  of  the  United  States,  and  also  Treasury  notes 
in  the  amount  of  $200,000,000,  bearing  interest  at  the 
rate  of  3§  per  cent.,  redeemable  at  the  pleasure  of  the 
United  States  after  two  years,  and  payable  in  ten 
years,  be  issued. 

The  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  was  authorized  to 
issue  any  of  these  bonds  or  notes  for  any  of  the  bonds 
of  the  United  States  as  they  became  redeemable,  par 
for  par,  the  3!  bonds  to  be  the  only  bonds  receivable 
as  security  for  national  bank  circulation. 

The  bill  as  introduced  and  reported  was  in  harmony 
with  the  recommendations  made  by  Secretary  Sherman 
in  his  annual  report,  and  if  it  had  been  passed  in  that 
form  it  would  have  saved  the  United  States  great 
sums  of  money,  and  would  have  measurably  strength 
ened  the  public  credit.  But  the  Democratic  House 
tore  the  bill  to  pieces.  All  sorts  of  queer  and  erratic 


Sound  Finance  167 

amendments  were  offered,  and  the  Ways  and  Means 
Committee  acquiesced  in  so  many  of  them,  that,  in 
the  judgment  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  the 
execution  of  the  law,  had  it  been  passed,  would  have 
been  out  of  the  question.  The  rate  of  interest  was 
reduced  to  3  per  cent.,  and  a  provision  was  made  that 
no  bonds  should  be  taken  as  security  for  bank  circu 
lation,  or  government  deposits,  except  the  3  per  cent, 
bonds  thus  provided.  The  bill,  distorted,  passed  the 
House  on  January  19,  1881.  The  Senate  Committee 
on  Finance  amended  it  so  as  to  eliminate  the  more 
objectionable  features,  restoring  the  rate  of  interest 
to  3i  per  cent.  The  bill  was  taken  up  in  the  Senate 
on  February  i5th.  It  was  important  that  some 
sensible  legislation  should  be  had.  In  a  little  more 
than  sixty  days  from  that  time,  bonds  bearing  in 
terest  at  5  per  cent.,  to  the  amount  of  $469,651,050, 
would  become  payable  at  the  option  of  the  Government. 
On  the  thirtieth  of  June  two  other  loans,  each  bearing 
6  per  cent.,  the  first  for  $145,786,500,  the  second  for 
$57,787,250,  would  also  mature,  at  the  option  of  the 
Government.  This  extravagant  rate  of  interest  might 
have  been  exchanged  for  the  then  reasonable  rate  of 
3J  per  cent.,  if  the  impossible  elements  of  Congress 
had  been  willing  to  listen  to  reason.  It  was  felt  by 
the  masters  of  finance  that  a  bond  of  a  lower  rate 
than  3  J  per  cent,  could  not  be  floated  under  conditions 
then  existing,  but  the  radicals  in  the  Senate  and  in 
the  House  insisted  that  the  rate  should  be  at  least 
as  low  as  3  per  cent.  It  was  in  the  days  of  fanatical 
opposition  to  the  national  banks,  many  of  which  were 
approaching  the  end  of  the  twenty  years'  period  for 
which  they  were  originally  chartered,  and  nothing 
was  regarded  as  unreasonable  which  would  compel 


1 68  Orville  H.  Platt 

the  banks  to  accept  a  low  rate  of  interest  for  the  bonds 
required  to  be  deposited  for  circulation.  Twenty 
years  later,  it  was  found  possible  to  float  over  $600,- 
000,000  of  2  per  cent,  consols,  and  Mr.  Platt  was  among 
those  who  favored  that  rate  of  interest  in  1900.  But 
that  low  rate  of  interest  could  not  have  been  ob 
tained  had  it  not  been  for  artificial  devices,  the  wis 
dom  of  resorting  to  which  is  now  seriously  in  question. 
In  speaking  of  the  funding  bill  of  February  17,  1881, 
Mr.  Platt  began  by  quoting  the  homely  phrase,  "  It 
is  better  to  be  safe  than  to  be  sorry.  "  He  asked : 

What  is  a  fair  rate  of  interest?  It  is  certainly  not  the 
highest  rate  which  the  lender  would  take  if  he  could  get  it. 
It  may  not  be  the  lowest  rate  at  which  the  Government  can 
induce  the  lender  to  part  with  his  money.  What  is  a  fair 
rate  of  interest,  if  we  consider  only  this  day  and  this  hour, 
may  be  a  very  unfair  rate  of  interest  before  the  five  years' 
option  shall  expire,  or  before  the  twenty  years  shall  have 
expired  when  these  bonds  mature.  If  it  be  found  to  be  an 
unfair  rate  of  interest,  the  result  will  be  that  these  bonds 
will  go  below  par,  a  disaster  I  think  which  would  more  than 
overbalance  all  the  benefits  to  be  derived  from  the  saving 
which  the  Government  might  make  in  the  difference  be 
tween  3J  and  3  per  cent.  I  believe  that  rate  to  be  fairest 
and  wisest  and  best  which,  during  the  whole  period  that 
these  bonds  are  to  remain  outstanding,  will  maintain  them 
at  or  substantially  at  par,  always  excepting  times  of  panic, 
against  which  we  can  not  provide,  and  the  coming  of  which 
we  can  not  certainly  foretell. 

He  then  asked  a  question  which  reads  somewhat 
strangely  in  view  of  the  ease  with  which  the  $200,- 
000,000  Spanish  War  loan  was  floated  in  1898  at  three 
per  cent.,  and  $730,000,000  in  consols  and  Panama 
bonds  have  been  floated  since  1900: 


Sound  Finance  169 

Does  any  one  who  does  not  listen  to  the  interested  specu 
lators  of  Wall  Street,  and  whose  eyes  are  not  blinded  with 
the  glamour  of  stock  speculation,  believe  that  a  three  per 
cent,  bond  or  a  three  and  one  quarter  per  cent,  bond  is  to  re 
main  at  par  in  this  country  during  the  next  five,  ten,  or 
twenty  years?  I  think  I  may  safely  assume  that  the  an 
swer  to  that  question  must  be  in  the  negative ;  and  I  suggest 
to  those  who  desire  to  win  a  cheap  glory  for  this  Govern 
ment  in  placing  this  bond  at  a  lower  rate  of  interest  than 
any  other  government  has  ever  been  able  to  place  its  bonds, 
to  consider  the  probability  of  these  bonds  at  a  three  per 
cent,  interest  being  at  90  or  85,  and  to  ask  themselves 
whether  the  whole  country  will  not  then  point  to  the  un 
wisdom  of  their  position  of  to-day.  ' 

He  could  not  tolerate  the  inference  that,  because  the 
banks  were  largely  to  take  the  bonds,  it  was  of  no 
consequence  at  how  low  a  rate  of  interest  Congress 
could  compel  the  banks  to  accept  the  bonds  and  be 
satisfied : 

I  have  no  interest  in  national  banks;  I  do  not  own  a 
dollar  of  stock  in  a  bank,  and  therefore  I  may  say  that  I 
have  no  patience  with  the  sentiment  abroad  in  this  country 
which  cries  "Down  with  the  national  banks!"  We  should 
not  have  a  country  to-day  if  the  banking  system  had  not 
been  adopted  and  put  in  operation;  we  should  not  have 
prosperous  business  to-day;  we  should  not  have  good  times 
to-day,  if  it  had  not  been  for  that  wise  system  of  banking — 
the  wisest  and  the  best  in  my  judgment  that  exists  on 
the  face  of  the  earth — a  system  which  furnishes  absolute 
security  to  the  bill  holder.  No  man  in  this  broad  land  ever 
lost  one  dollar  upon  the  bills  of  a  national  bank,  and  no 
man  ever  will. 

He  did  not  believe  that,  even  at  3!  per  cent,  interest, 
the  bonds  then  held  by  national  banks  would  be  fully 
replaced  by  new  bonds,  and  he  suggested  that  any 


i7o  Orville  H.  Platt 

Senator  put  the  question  to  "  his  conservative  banking 
friend,  as  every  Senator  has  such  a  friend  in  whom  he 
places  implicit  confidence. "  He  believed  that  there 
must  be  a  sudden  and  violent  contraction  of  the 
national  bank  circulation : 

If  it  were  not  for  that  fact  I  should  regard  the  issue  of 
Treasury  notes  as  a  dangerous  measure,  in  that  it  would 
inflate  suddenly  the  currency  of  the  country,  and  then  as 
suddenly,  when  interest  had  accumulated  upon  them,  con 
tract  it  again.  It  will  be  my  hope  that  to  some  degree  they 
may  supply  the  place  made  by  the  retirement  of  the  national 
bank  circulation  under  this  act. 

He  would  rather  pay  four  per  cent,  than  three  per 
cent,  and  he  believed  that  with  the  exception  of  the 
men  in  Wall  Street  who,  for  purposes  of  speculation, 
were  running  government  bonds  up  beyond  their 
intrinsic  value,  the  business  men  of  the  country  would 
prefer  that  the  rate  should  be  four  per  cent,  rather  than 
less  than  three  and  a  half  per  cent. : 

This  Government,  if  the  bond  is  really  worth  more  than 
par  at  three  and  a  half  per  cent., will  reap  its  advantage  in  the 
increased  premium ;  the  Government  will  lose  nothing ;  and 
it  will  thus  prevent  a  loss  falling  eventually  upon  that  class 
of  people  who  are  least  able  to  bear  it,  to  a  great  extent, 
and  whom  we  least  desire  should  bear  the  loss,  if  any  there 
is  to  be. 

But  the  rate  of  interest  that  is  to  be  paid  in  business  trans 
actions  during  the  next  five,  ten,  or  twenty  years,  is  to  be 
largely  affected  by  the  rate  of  interest  which  the  Govern 
ment  places  upon  this  loan.  I  know  that  the  government 
rate  of  interest  is  not  the  only  thing  which  influences  the 
business  rate  of  interest;  but  it  does  influence  it;  it  does 
have  its  effect  upon  it.  When  you  reduce  the  government 
interest,  there  follows  or  goes  along  with  it  a  reduction  in  the 


Sound  Finance  171 

business  rate  of  interest.  The  business  rate  of  interest  is  a 
most  important  factor  in  the  future  prosperity  of  this  coun 
try.  If  it  be  too  low  there  is  danger  in  it  as  surely  as  if  it 
be  too  high.  If  the  rate  of  interest  be  too  high,  what  is  the 
result?  It  eats  up  capital,  it  eats  up  the  capital  invested 
in  all  business  enterprises,  and  bankruptcy  follows,  hard 
times  follow.  And  what  if  it  be  too  low  ?  The  capitalists 
seek  other  avenues  for  investment,  they  are  tempted  into 
speculative  enterprises,  and  they  will  do  what  they  are  doing 
to-day — put  their  money  at  risk  for  the  sake  of  obtaining 
a  higher  rate  of  interest  than  the  current  rate.  What  is  the 
result  of  that?  Overspeculation,  overtrading,  followed  by 
panic,  by  depression,  by  hard  times.  What  this  country 
needs,  what  the  business  of  the  country  needs,  is  a  stable, 
fair  rate  of  interest,  one  which  shall  neither  be  too  high  nor 
too  low ;  and  I  think  in  fixing  the  rate  of  this  government 
loan  we  should  have  in  view  the  influence  that  the  govern 
ment  rate  of  interest  is  to  have  upon  the  business  rate  of 
interest. 

Mr.  President,  all  these  considerations  lead  me  to  hope 
that  the  recommendation  of  the  Committee  will  be  adopted ; 
that  we  shall  neither  make  the  rate  3  per  cent.,  nor  3! 
per  cent.,  nor  shall  we  change  the  recommendation  of  the 
Committee  by  saying  at  a  rate  not  exceeding  3^  per  cent. 
I  think  there  is  great  force  in  the  fact  that  when  you  are 
dealing  with  the  men  of  Wall  Street,  as  you  must  to  a  cer 
tain  extent  deal  with  them  in  placing  this  loan,  it  is  not 
wise  to  say  to  them:  "We  will  sell  our  bonds  at  3  per  cent, 
if  you  will  take  them;  if  not,  we  will  let  you  have  them 
at  3!."  I  believe  that  the  legislative  branch  of  the  Govern 
ment  should  fix  a  rate  at  which  it  knows,  as  well  as  it  can 
be  assured  of  anything,  that  the  loan  will  be  placed,  and 
placed  quickly,  and  that  rate  should  be  certain,  not  left 
to  the  discretion  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury. 

In  spite  of  the  attitude  of  the  administration  and 
the  arguments  of  some  of  the  most  influential  Demo- 


Orville  H.  Platt 

cratk  Senators,  among  them  Mr.  Bayard,  Chairman 
of  the  Finance  Committee,  the  Senate,  after  long 
debate,  disagreed  to  the  amendments  of  the  Com 
mittee  and  passed  the  bill  substantially  as  it  came  from 
the  House.  Had  the  bill  become  a  law  in  this  form, 
it  would  have  imperilled  the  national  banking  system, 
and  the  fear  of  this  result  caused  a  serious  flurry  in 
the  money  market  during  the  last  week  in  February, 
while  the  country  was  awaiting  the  action  of  the  Presi 
dent.  On  the  3d  of  March  the  President  returned  the 
bill  with  his  veto.  "  Under  Section  5  of  the  bill,  "  he 
said: 

It  is  obvious  that  no  additional  banks  will  hereafter  be 
organized  except  possibly  in  a  few  cities  or  localities  where 
the  prevailing  rates  of  interest  in  ordinary  business  are 
extremely  low.  No  new  banks  can  be  organized  and  no 
increase  of  the  capital  of  existing  banks  can  be  obtained, 
except  by  the  purchase  and  deposit  of  3  per  cent,  bonds. 
No  other  bonds  of  the  United  States  can  be  used  for  the 
purpose.  The  one  thousand  millions  of  other  bonds  re 
cently  issued  by  the  United  States,  and  bearing  a  higher 
interest  than  3  per  cent.,  and  therefore  a  better  security 
for  the  bill  holders,  cannot,  after  the  first  of  July  next,  be 
received  as  security  for  bank  circulation.  This  is  a  radical 
change  in  the  banking  law.  It  takes  from  the  banks  the 
right  they  heretofore  had  under  the  law  to  purchase  and 
deposit  as  security  for  the  circulation  any  of  the  bonds 
issued  by  the  United  States,  and  deprives  the  bill  holder 
of  the  best  security  which  the  banks  are  able  to  give,  by 
requiring  them  to  deposit  bonds  having  the  least  value  of 
any  bonds  issued  by  the  Government. 

Two  years  later,  on  February  10,  1883,  during  the 
second  session  of  the  Forty-seventh  Congress,  during 
the  debate  on  a  bill  reducing  internal-revenue  duties, 


Sound  Finance  173 

Mr.  Platt  made  a  proposition  to  abolish  the  tax  on 
national- bank  circulation,  thus  bringing  down  on  his 
head  the  reproaches  of  Mr.  Sherman  and  Mr.  Morrill, 
then  at  the  head  of  the  Finance  Committee.  The  bill, 
which  became  a  law  on  March  3,  1883,  described, 
among  other  taxes  to  be  abolished,  the  tax  on  bank 
checks,  bank  capital,  and  bank  deposits.  During  its 
consideration  in  the  Senate,  Mr.  Platt  moved  to 
amend,  by  inserting  the  words: 

"And  on  bank  circulation,  as  provided  in  the  third 
clause  of  Section  3408  of  the  Revised  Statutes  of  the 
United  States. " 

In  advocating  this  amendment,  he  said: 

If  we  are  to  remove  all  the  internal-revenue  taxes  except 
the  tax  on  whiskey  and  a  portion  of  the  tax  on  tobacco,  I 
can  see  no  reason  why  the  tax  should  be  left  upon  the 
circulation  of  banks.  I  can  see  no  reason  why  the  tax 
should  be  removed  from  bank  deposits  and  bank  capital, 
and  be  left  upon  bank  circulation.  There  are,  to  my 
mind,  many  reasons  why,  if  a  discrimination  is  to  be 
made,  the  tax  upon  circulation  should  be  repealed,  and 
not  upon  deposits ;  and  I  will  state  them  very  briefly : 

The  deposit  tax  is  the  tax  easiest  paid  by  the  banks.  The 
repeal  of  the  tax  on  deposits  will  relieve  the  banks  which 
least  need  relief.  The  repeal  of  the  tax  upon  circulation 
will  relieve  the  banks  which  most  need  relief.  Of  course 
the  city  banks  are  the  great  deposit  banks  of  the  country ; 
they  have  deposits  many  times  in  excess  of  their  capital, 
and  they  are  banks  of  small  circulation.  When  you  go 
into  the  country,  the  conditions  are  reversed.  The  country 
banks  are  banks  of  small  deposits  and  of  large  circulation. 
...  If  there  is  to  be  any  tax  left  on  banks  it  should  be 
the  tax  on  deposits,  and  the  tax  on  circulation  should 
be  repealed  for  the  benefit  of  the  country  banks,  the  weak 
banks,  the  conservative  banks,  the  banks  that  never 


174  Orville  H.  Platt 

indulge  in  or  countenance  speculation,  and  are  conducted 
for  the  benefit  of  the  people  and  the  business  interests  of 
the  communities  where  they  are  located. 

Mr.  Sherman  denounced  this  proposition  as  mon 
strous,  and  Mr.  Morrill  expressed  regret  that  the  subject 
had  been  introduced.  No  vote  was  taken  on  the 
amendment,  and  nothing  more  was  ever  heard  of  it. 
The  tax  on  circulation  remained  at  one  per  cent,  until 
the  passage  of  the  law  of  1900,  which  reduced  the  tax 
to  one-half  per  cent.,  when  circulation  is  secured  by 
two  per  cent,  consols.  Recent  proposals  to  abolish  al 
together  the  tax  on  circulation  secured  by  two  per 
cents,  have  not  been  denounced  as  "monstrous." 


CHAPTER  XIV 

THE  FREE-SILVER  DELUSION 

A  Genuine  Bimetallist — Opposes  Coin  Certificates    in   1888 — The 

Sherman    Law    of    1890 — Opponent  of  Free   Silver — Objects 

to  Hasty  Repeal — Retaliation  against  Great  Britain. 

WHEN  Platt  became  a  Senator,  free  silver  was  a 
dormant  issue .  The  Greenback  heresy  had  seen 
its  day,  and  its  devotees  had  shifted  their  allegiance 
to  the  "  dollar  of  the  Fathers  "  as  the  next  worst  thing. 
The  Democratic  party,  from  force  of  habit,  had  ac 
cepted  the  new  doctrine,  and  they  were  reinforced  by 
Republicans  from  silver-mining  States,  while  other  Re 
publicans  weakly  wavered.  The  issue  had  been  joined 
in  Congress,  resulting  in  a  compromise  upon  the  so-called 
Bland- Allison  Silver  Act  of  1878,  which  was  as  far  from 
satisfying  the  advocates  of  free-silver  coinage  as  the 
friends  of  a  stable  medium  of  exchange,  but  which  for 
a  time  served  as  a  makeshift  to  keep  the  silver  question 
out  of  Congress  except  for  sporadic  outbursts  of 
debate.1  Though  the  question  was  kept  out  of  Con 
gress,  the  friends  of  silver  were  not  idle.  After  the 
election  of  Cleveland  in  1884,  they  made  a  vigorous 
demonstration,  which  was  held  in  check  only  by  the 
President's  firm  stand  against  the  majority  of  his  own 

i  The  Democratic  House  had  passed  a  straight  free-coinage  bill 
under  suspension  of  the  rules  by  a  vote  of  163  to  34.  The  measure 
was  modified  by  the  Senate,  which  had  a  Republican  majority. 


176  Orville  H.  Platt 

party,  and  which  so  impressed  itself  upon  the  politics 
of  the  day,  that  when  the  Republicans  returned  to 
power  in  1888  they  found  it  necessary  to  consider 
further  legislation  which,  stopping  short  of  free  coinage, 
should  mollify  prevailing  sentiment  by  providing  for 
a  larger  use  of  silver. 

Platt  had  been  a  sturdy  antagonist  of  the  Greenback 
propaganda.  He  was  opposed  not  only  to  inflation 
but  to  the  greenback  in  itself,  and  up  to  the  end  he 
seldom  touched  upon  the  currency  in  any  form  without 
uttering  a  note  of  warning  against  that  survival  of 
the  operation  of  Civil  War  finance.  He  was  just  as 
sturdy  an  opponent  of  free  silver  at  the  ratio  of  1 6  to 
i,  but  he  had  no  prejudice  against  silver  as  a  medium 
of  exchange.  He  was  an  international  bimetallist, 
and  so  he  always  remained.  With  him  bimetallism 
was  not  a  political  evasion,  it  was  a  serious  economic 
proposition.  He  believed  there  was  a  place  for  both 
silver  and  gold  in  the  currency  of  the  world,  if  the 
great  commercial  nations  would  agree,  and  he  believed 
that  the  danger  of  silver  coinage  would  be  greatly 
mitigated  if  the  coin  itself  were  used  in  the  currency 
instead  of  silver  certificates  issued  by  the  Government. 
Holding  these  views,  it  fell  to  his  lot  to  be  of  material 
service  in  bringing  hostile  forces  together  and  so  pre 
venting  the  enactment  of  a  free-coinage  law,  when  that 
peril  was  imminent  in  1890. 

He  first  declared  his  position  in  the  Senate  on  the 
silver  question  in  the  course  of  a  debate  during  the 
first  session  of  the  Fiftieth  Congress  in  1888  on  an 
amendment  offered  by  Stewart  of  Nevada  to  a  bill 
1  'To  provide  for  the  purchase  of  United  States  bonds 
by  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury."  Stewart  proposed 
to  authorize  the  issue  of  coin  certificates  at  United 


The  Free-Silver  Delusion  177 

States  mints  and  assay  offices  in  return  for  deposits 
of  gold  and  silver  bullion,  the  price  of  silver  bullion 
to  be  stated  by  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  on  the 
first  and  fifteenth  of  each  calendar  month,  but  not  to 
exceed  $i  for  412^  grains  of  silver,  nine-tenths  fine. 
In  the  opinion  of  Mr.  Platt  this  proposition  reeked 
with  financial  heresy,  and  he  spoke  with  force  and 
earnestness  against  it.  The  decline  in  the  price  of 
silver,  after  the  enactment  of  the  Bland- Allison  act, 
had  been  responsible  largely  for  the  continued  agita 
tion  of  the  silver  question,  and  the  advocates  of  the 
pending  amendment  insisted  that  its  enactment  would 
put  silver  at  par.  Mr.  Platt  reminded  them  that  silver 
had  declined,  as  all  other  things  declined,  because  there 
had  been  an  over-production  of  it  in  the  world — more 
than  was  required  for  coinage  and  other  uses,  including 
manufacturing  and  the  arts : 

Why  should  the  adoption  of  the  proposed  measure  put 
silver  at  par?  Because  it  will  furnish  a  customer  for  all 
the  silver  that  can  be  mined  in  the  whole  world.  And 
what  will  be  the  effect  of  that?  Simply  that  mining  will 
be  more  profitable,  will  attract  new  capital,  will  enlist 
new  enterprise,  and  the  more  it  is  produced  the  more  the 
Government  must  take  of  it  and  issue  the  coin  cer 
tificates  for  it,  and  this  not  only  in  the  United  States,  but 
throughout  the  world.  There  is  nothing  to  prevent  the 
bringing  of  silver  to  this  country,  and  there  is  nothing 
to  prevent  any  foreigner,  anybody  on  the  whole  face  of  the 
wide  globe,  from  bringing  all  his  surplus  silver  to  the 
Treasury  of  the  United  States  and  taking  the  coin  cer 
tificates  of  this  Government  for  it. 

If  this  bill  passes,  the  Senator  from  Nevada  may  well 
say  there  will  be  prosperity.  There  will,  but  it  will  be  the 
prosperity  which  comes  with  inflation,  to  be  followed  at 
last  by  worse  adversity.  The  history  of  the  world  has 


178  Orville  H.  Platt 

shown  that  when  a  government  begins,  upon  the  demand 
for  more  money,  to  increase  its  paper  money,  there  is  no 
end  of  that  increase  and  inflation  except  absolute  bank 
ruptcy  and  financial  ruin. 

The  Stewart  amendment  was  absorbed  in  an  amend 
ment  offered  by  Mr.  Beck,  of  Kentucky,  substituting 
coin  certificates  for  the  existing  gold  and  silver 
certificates.  The  Beck  amendment  was  adopted 
by  a  vote  of  38  to  13  and  Mr.  Platt  was  enrolled  with 
the  small  minority.  The  bill,  thus  amended,  passed 
the  Senate  on  April  5,  1888,  without  division.  It 
never  became  a  law  but  the  popular  call  for  free  coinage 
continued.  It  became  so  strong  that  at  the  beginning 
of  the  new  administration  in  1889,  Secretary  Windom, 
with  the  approval  of  President  Harrison,  submitted 
to  Congress,  in  his  first  annual  report,  his  plan  for 
increasing  the  use  of  silver  in  circulation.  This  plan 
provided  that  the  Treasury  Department  should  pur 
chase  silver  bullion  every  month  to  a  limited  extent, 
paying  therefor  Treasury  notes  receivable  for  govern 
ment  dues,  and  payable  on  demand  in  gold,  or  in 
silver  bullion  at  the  current  market  rate,  at  the  time 
of  payment,  and  that  the  purchase  of  silver  bullion 
and  the  compulsory  coinage  of  silver  dollars  under  the 
Act  of  1878  should  close.  On  the  twenty-eighth  of 
January,  1890,  Senator  Morrill,  Chairman  of  the 
Finance  Committee,  introduced  a  bill  prepared  by  the 
Secretary  of  the  Treasury  and  embodying  his  views. 
The  bill  was  reported  favorably  by  the  Finance  Com 
mittee  with  certain  amendments.  Its  important  sec 
tion  was  the  first,  which  authorized  the  Secretary  of 
the  Treasury  to  purchase  $4,500,000  worth  of  silver 
bullion  each  month  and  to  issue  in  payment  therefor 
Treasury  notes  receivable  for  customs  and  all  public 


The  Free-Silver  Delusion  179 

dues,  and  redeemable  on  demand  in  lawful  money  of 
the  United  States;  when  so  redeemed  to  be  cancelled. 
A  similar  bill  had  been  passed  by  the  House,  the 
principal  difference  being  that  under  the  House  bill 
the  notes  to  be  issued  were  full  legal  tender,  and  the 
Secretary  of  the  Treasury  was  authorized  to  redeem 
them  in  gold  coin  or  silver  bullion  at  the  market  rate. 

The  Senate  considered  these  measures  at  intervals 
for  over  three  months  in  a  notable  debate,  into  which 
entered  every  question  connected  with  the  financial 
operations  of  the  Government  since  the  war. 

The  debate  was  carried  on  largely  by  the  friends  of 
free  silver,  who  declaimed  at  great  length  of  the  ini 
quity  of  the  "Crime  of  '73  " ;  for  the  proposal  of  the  Fi 
nance  Committee  and  the  bill  passed  by  the  House  were 
a  long  way  from  meeting  their  demands.  The  opponents 
of  free  silver  contented  themselves,  as  a  rule,  with 
replying  to  the  arguments  advanced,  and  with  taking 
up,  point  by  point,  questions  as  they  arose  during 
the  discussion.  Mr.  Platt  had  little  to  say  except  to 
interpolate  an  occasional  query.  Toward  the  end 
of  the  debate,  on  June  13,  1890,  he  interrupted  a 
speech  of  Mr.  Stewart  with  the  following  comment: 

Does  the  Senator  believe — and  he  has  paid  great  atten 
tion  to  this  subject,  and  his  opinion  is  entitled  to  great 
weight — that  if  the  maximum  amount  now  provided  by 
law  to  be  coined  into  silver  dollars  were  to  be  coined,  the 
result  of  that  would  be  to  restore  the  equivalency  in  value 
between  the  gold  and  silver  dollar.''  Because  if  he  does 
and  is  correct  in  his  supposition,  I  confess  that  it  seems 
to  me  that  is  a  ground  upon  which  we  might  all  come 
together.  .  .  . 

If  the  Senator  will  permit  me  one  other  word,  some  of 
us  have  this  difficulty :  We  feel  that  if  we  use  the  two  metals 


i8o  Orville  H.  Platt 

as  money — and  we  feel  that  we  ought  to  do  it — the  material 
of  which  a  dollar  is  composed  in  each  metal  ought  to  be 
the  same.  I  do  not  suppose  that  in  1878,  if  it  had  been 
an  original  proposition,  anybody  would  have  thought  of 
coining  a  silver  dollar  of  which  the  material  was  not  of  the 
same  commercial  value  as  the  material  in  the  gold  dollar; 
but  it  was  thought  that  a  great  wrong  had  been  done,  that 
silver  had  been  demonetized  when  the  material  of  which 
the  dollar  was  composed  was  worth  as  much  as  the  gold 
dollar,  and  that  wrong  ought  to  be  righted,  and  that  we 
ought  to  take  the  same  ratio  although  the  value  of  the 
silver  had  depreciated;  and  that,  I  understand,  was  the 
ground  upon  which  the  bill  of  1878  was  passed. 

Now,  if  there  is  any  way  in  which  we  can  get  back  so  as 
to  have  the  material  of  which  one  dollar  is  composed  of 
the  same  value  of  which  the  other  dollar  is  composed, 
then  we  should  all  get  back  upon  a  common  platform. 

Four  days  later,  on  June  i7th,  an  amendment  pro 
posed  by  Senator  Plumb,  striking  out  the  first  section 
of  the  bill  and  inserting  in  its  place  an  unqualified 
provision  for  the  free  coinage  of  silver  at  16  to  i,  was 
adopted  by  a  vote  of  43  to  24,  the  favoring  votes  coming 
from  the  Democratic  side  of  the  chamber,  and  from 
Republican  Senators  of  silver-producing  States. 

The  ultimate  result  was  the  Sherman  Silver  act. 
Mr.  Sherman  was  at  the  head  of  the  Conference  Com 
mittee  for  the  Senate  and  Mr.  Conger  of  Iowa  for  the 
House.  It  took  nearly  three  weeks  for  the  Conference 
Committee  to  approach  a  reconciliation  of  the  wide 
differences  between  the  two  sides,  and  Senator  Platt 
had  more  to  do  than  almost  any  other  man  in  bringing 
the  free  silver  Senators  to  accept  a  compromise. 
When  the  report  was  finally  made,  on  July  yth,  Senator 
Harris  of  Tennessee,  and  Representative  Bland  of 
Missouri,  the  Democratic  free  silver  members  of  the 


The  Free-Silver  Delusion  181 

conference,  refused  to  sign  it.  The  bill  as  finally 
passed  provided  for  the  purchase  of  4,500,000  ounces 
of  silver  bullion  per  month,  instead  of  $4,500,000,  a 
change,  which,  owing  to  the  subsequent  fall  in  the 
price  of  silver,  reduced  the  amount  to  be  purchased. 
It  also  contained  an  important  new  clause,  declaring 
the  purpose  of  the  Government  to  maintain  the  parity 
of  the  metals. 

Mr.  Sherman,  from  whom  the  act  took  its  name, 
although  he  was  not  primarily  responsible  for  it,  de 
clared  a  few  years  later  that  he  was  ready  to  repeal 
it  the  day  it  became  a  law,  if  repeal  could  have  been 
had  without  substituting  in  its  place  absolute  free 
coinage.  Mr.  Platt,  while  no  more  nearly  satisfied 
with  the  act  than  others,  was  never  carried  away 
with  the  clamor  against  it  which  began  almost  im 
mediately,  grew  in  volume  after  the  election  of  Cleve 
land  in  1892,  and  continued  unabated  until  after  the 
repeal  of  the  purchasing  clause  in  the  following  autumn. 
Having  voted  for  the  law  as  a  compromise,  and  worked 
for  it  to  avoid  the  evil  of  free  coinage,  which  was 
threatening,  and  which  would  surely  have  carried  in 
the  House  after  passing  the  Senate,  had  it  not  been  for 
the  superb  courage  of  Speaker  Reed,  he  was  never 
ready  to  denounce  it  as  an  unquestioned  evil  in  itself, 
although  with  other  Republican  Senators  in  1893,  he 
upheld  the  hands  of  President  Cleveland  in  voting 
for  the  repeal. 

During  the  winter  of  1892-93,  succeeding  the  second 
election  of  President  Cleveland,  Eastern  Democratic 
and  Mugwump  newspapers  and  periodicals,  unwilling 
to  acknowledge  the  threat  of  tariff  revision  to  be  re 
sponsible  for  the  then  impending  financial  disturbance, 
entered  upon  a  crusade  for  the  repeal  of  the  Sherman 


1 82  Orville  H.  Platt 

law,  demanding  that  the  Congress  then  in  session 
enter  at  once  upon  that  imperative  task,  and  ignoring 
the  obvious  fact  that  no  legislation  of  such  importance 
could  be  agreed  upon  by  a  Republican  Senate  and  a 
Democratic  House  in  the  few  weeks  remaining  before  the 
fourth  of  March,  when  a  single  free  silver  Senator, 
with  stout  lungs,  was  physically  capable  of  preventing 
any  legislation  whatever.  One  of  those  who  joined 
in  the  cry  was  Henry  C.  Bowen,  editor  of  the  New 
York  Independent,  who  sent  to  his  old  friend,  Mr. 
Platt,  a  galley  proof  of  an  editorial  entitled  "  Repeal 
the  Silver  Law  "  which  was  going  to  appear  in  his  publi 
cation.  Mr.  Platt  wrote  him  a  letter  of  mild  reproof, 
which  contained  food  for  thought : 

A  galley  proof  of  the  article  in  The  Independent  of 
January  fifth,  entitled  "Repeal  the  Silver  Law,"  has  been 
sent  me.  I  suppose  it  reflects  your  views  as  well  as  the 
views  of  the  paper. 

In  my  opinion,  however,  some  things  ought  to  be  con 
sidered,  which  do  not  seem  to  have  attracted  the  attention 
of  people  who  are  so  earnestly  urging  the  repeal  of  that  law. 

First.  By  means  of  it  the  country  has  been  furnished 
with  a  circulation  amounting  to  practically  $4,500,000  a 
month  since  August,  1890.  That  this  addition  has  not 
been  more  than  was  needed  is  shown  conclusively,  I  think, 
by  the  fact  that  it  has  not  resulted  in  an  increase  of  prices, 
and  therefore  is  not  in  any  sense  inflation.  I  believe, 
moreover,  that  the  prosperity  of  the  country  has  been 
full  as  much  due  to  this  increase  of  currency — which  some 
what  keeps  pace  with  our  increase  of  population  and 
business — as  to  our  tariff  legislation  or  any  other  thing. 
Without  it  we  should  have  had  relative  contraction,  and, 
I  think,  more  or  less  financial  distress.  And  now  when 
the  Treasury  is  running  on  a  somewhat  narrow  margin, 
and  every  little  scare  operates  to  make  a  squeeze  in  money, 


The  Free-Silver  Delusion  183 

can  we  afford  to  cut  off  this  circulation  without  putting 
something  in  its  place? 

I  see  your  article  suggests  that  this  should  be  done.  To 
that  I  reply  that  the  substitution  of  any  other  form  of 
circulation  is  a  practical  impossibility.  Three  methods 
are  spoken  of : 

First, — the  increase  of  national  bank  circulation,  which 
is  absolutely  hopeless.  New  York  does  not  realize  the 
temper  of  the  country,  which  is  much  more  likely  in  the  next 
administration  to  prohibit  the  issue  of  currency  by  national 
banks  than  to  increase  it.  Of  course,  I  regret  this  temper. 
But  the  increased  issue  of  national  bank  circulation  cannot, 
in  my  judgment,  get  the  vote  of  one  third  of  the  Senate 
or  House. 

Second, — a  return  to  the  "Bland"  act.  I  would  rather 
buy  four  and  a  half  million  ounces  of  silver  a  month,  and 
issue  treasury  notes  to  the  exact  amount  of  purchase, 
than  to  buy  two  millions  a  month  and  coin  it  into  three 
millions,  and  issue  silver  certificates  to  the  amount  of 
three  millions  for  the  purchase  of  two. 

Third, — the  repeal  of  the  tax  on  State  bank  circulation, 
which  is  the  only  probable  method  of  continuing  the  in 
crease  of  currency,  if  the  so-called  Sherman  law  should 
be  repealed.  I  am  convinced  that  the  Democratic  party, 
with  Mr.  Cleveland  at  its  head,  does  intend  to  do  this,  if 
it  can  repeal  the  present  law ;  and  I  would  rather  continue 
the  Sherman  law  than  resort  to  that. 

Have  you  thought  of  the  probable  effect  of  repealing 
or  suspending  the  Sherman  law,  upon  the  price  of  silver, 
and  if  it  should  result  in  a  further  serious  fall  whether 
that  would  not  precipitate  a  premium  on  gold  quicker  than 
a  further  continuance  of  silver  purchases?  The  present 
law  makes  a  market  for  more  than  one  third  of  the  world's 
product  of  silver.  Suppose  that  demand  to  be  with 
drawn,  and  that  silver  should  fall  from  its  price  of  about 
67  cents  on  the  dollar  of  gold  to,  say,  50  cents  on  the  dollar, 
how  long  would  it  be  before  the  Treasury  notes  which  have 


184  Orville  H.  Platt 

been  issued  since  August,  1890,  payable  in  "coin,"  would 
be  presented  at  the  Treasury  for  redemption  ?  The  Treas 
ury  would  feel  bound  to  pay  them  in  gold  as  long  as  it 
could,  and  how  long  could  it? 

The  silver  certificates  issued  upon  the  coined  dollars  are 
redeemable  only  in  silver  by  law.  But  would  they  continue 
to  circulate  at  par  with  a  gold  dollar,  if  silver  should  fall 
to  50  cents  on  the  dollar?  In  the  downward  course  of 
silver  a  point  would  be  reached  where  gold  would  go  to  a 
premium.  It  might  not  be  at  50  cents  on  the  dollar;  but 
there  is  a  point  somewhere  in  the  downward  price  of  silver 
when  the  silver  certificates  and  the  silver  dollar  would  not 
pass  for  the  equal  of  the  gold  dollar,  and  then  gold  would 
be  immediately  at  a  premium. 

There  is  but  one  answer  to  this,  and  that  is  that  the 
situation  is  not  to  be  ultimately  relieved  by  a  further  con 
tinuance  of  silver  purchases.  But  I  have  thought  that 
perhaps  the  production  of  silver  was  now  being  reduced 
by  the  low  price,  and  that  except  for  the  fact  that  the 
Sherman  law  might  be  repealed  in  the  near  future,  silver 
would  be  likely  to  advance  to  a  price  where  the  entire 
amount  purchased  under  that  law  would  be  equal  to  all  the 
certificates  that  have  been  issued. 

The  problem  is  one  of  great  difficulty.  I  believe  the 
evil  day  can  be  longer  postponed  by  continuing  the  pur 
chase  of  silver  than  by  immediate  cessation,  without  the 
possibility  of  putting  into  circulation  a  similar  amount  of 
currency  in  the  place  of  that  now  being  issued. 

Finally.  We  are  still  bound  until  next  May  in  good 
faith  to  try  to  bring  about  an  international  agreement 
for  the  enlarged  use  of  silver,  or  for  an  international  coin 
age  arrangement ;  and  it  would  be  discreditable  to  a  nation 
that  has  solicited  the  conference  to  attempt  to  bulldoze 
the  conference  by  refusing  to  use  silver  at  all.  My  own 
judgment  is  that  it  is  better  to  wait  till  that  conference  re 
assembles  next  May,  and  then  if  we  cannot  get  some  inter 
national  agreement  for  the  enlarged  use  of  silver  or  for  an 


The  Free-Silver  Delusion  185 

international  coinage  agreement,  to  tell  the  conference  that 
the  United  States  would  be  compelled  in  self-defence  to 
change  its  policy  with  regard  to  its  use. 

My  view,  too,  is  that  when  that  change  is  made,  it  should 
be  a  gradual  cessation  of  purchase  rather  than  a  total 
suspension. 

These  expressions  of  mine  are  purely  tentative.  I  do 
not  know  how  I  should  vote  on  a  given  bill,  which  might 
come  up  for  action.  But  it  seems  strange  to  me  that  people 
who  assume  such  financial  wisdom  should  apparently  have 
never  thought  of  these  things. 

In  spite  of  obvious  reasons  for  letting  the  currency 
alone  during  the  short  session,  the  unthinking  demand 
persisted,  inspired  chiefly  by  doctrinaires  with  heads 
in  the  clouds,  profoundly  oblivious  to  parliamentary 
possibilities.  Politicians,  to  ingratiate  themselves  with 
the  newspapers,  feigned  acquiescence  in  the  demand. 
David  B.  Hill,  of  New  York,  introduced  a  bill  to  repeal 
the  purchasing  clause  of  the  Sherman  act,  and  on 
February  6,  1893,  less  than  a  month  before  Congress 
must  come  to  an  end,  he  moved  to  take  it  up  for  con 
sideration.  It  was  a  political  play,  and  every  Senator 
knew  it,  but,  confronted  with  the  issue,  most  of  the 
gold  standard  Republicans,  for  the  sake  of  the  record, 
felt  compelled  to  vote  in  the  affirmative.  Mr.  Platt 
could  not  bring  himself  to  do  this,  but  joined  the  free 
silver  Republicans  and  the  Democrats  in  defeating  the 
motion.  To  his  friend  John  Flagg  he  wrote: 

I  fear  that  I  displeased  my  Connecticut  friends  to-day 
in  not  voting  to  take  up  the  silver  question,  but  the  thing 
was  so  plainly  and  manifestly  a  mere  fencing  for  political 
advantage,  that  I  was  sick  of  the  whole  matter.  Every 
Senator  who  voted  to  take  it  up  knew  there  was  not  the 
slightest  opportunity  to  get  it  to  a  vote,  and  I  did  not 


1 86  Orville  H.  Platt 

propose  to  vote  to  embarrass  the  business  of  the  session. 
I  am  not  quite  sure  that  I  am  in  favor  of  a  repeal  of  the 
Sherman  law  anyway.  I  should  vote  against  it  at  this 
session,  but  possibly  next  session  I  should  vote  for  it. 
I  don't  think  it  is  just  fair  to  nations  that  we  have  asked 
to  take  part  in  the  conference  to  change  the  situation 
while  the  conference  continues.  I  think  it  would  have  an 
unfavorable  effect  upon  the  conference,  and  what  I  sin 
cerely  desire  is  an  international  agreement  for  the  free 
coinage  of  silver.  I  confess  I  don't  know  what  is  going 
to  happen  if  we  can't  get  it.  I  think  to  discontinue  the 
use  of  silver  as  money  absolutely,  would  send  it  down  to  a 
point  where  we  would  be  quite  as  likely  to  get  on  to  a 
silver  basis  as  we  shall  by  continuing  the  law. 

The  pressure  continued,  the  expected  financial 
panic  arrived,  President  Cleveland  called  Congress 
in  special  session  to  repeal  the  purchasing  clause  of 
the  Sherman  law,  and  after  many  dreary  weeks  of 
debate,  the  clause  was  repealed.  Mr.  Platt  and  the 
majority  of  Republican  Senators  voted  for  the  repeal, 
in  company  with  a  few  Democrats,  but  it  has  never  yet 
been  demonstrated  that  the  repeal  of  the  act  materially 
relieved  the  financial  distress  which  continued  until  a 
succession  of  Republican  victories  had  at  last  assured 
the  great  industrial  interests  of  an  end  to  experimental 
legislation. 

The  next  opportunity  which  Mr.  Platt  accepted  to 
discuss  the  silver  question  was  during  the  debate  on 
the  Wilson-Gorman  Tariff  bill  in  the  spring  of  1894. 
Mr.  Lodge,  at  that  time  one  of  the  youngest  members 
of  the  Senate,  had  introduced  the  following  amendment 
to  the  bill : 

Except  that  when  not  in  contravention  of  any  existing 
treaty,  any  article  made  dutiable  in  the  following  sections 


The  Free-Silver  Delusion  187 

shall,  if  it  is  the  product  or  manufacture  of  Great  Britain 
or  of  any  of  the  colonies  of  Great  Britain,  pay  a  duty 
double  that  herein  imposed;  and  any  article  upon  the  free 
list  in  the  preceding  section  shall,  if  the  product  or  manu 
facture  of  Great  Britain  or  of  any  of  the  colonies  of  Great 
Britain,  pay  a  duty  of  35%  ad  valorem;  and  such  ad 
ditional  and  discriminating  duties  shall  remain  in  force 
until  Great  Britain  shall 'assent  to,  and  take  part  in,  an 
international  agreement  with  the  United  States  for  the  coin 
age  and  use  of  silver  and  shall  close  whenever  Great  Britain 
shall  assent  to,  and  take  part  in,  such  international  agree 
ment  for  the  coinage  of  silver. 

This  proposed  amendment,  which  attracted  much 
attention  at  the  time,  was  in  line  with  the  professions 
of  the  Republican  party  as  declared  in  its  platforms, 
and  was  intended  to  demonstrate  the  sincerity  of  the 
demand  for  an  international  agreement,  which  hitherto 
had  been  rendered  ineffectual  through  the  immobility 
of  British  statesmanship. 

Mr.  Platt,  as  has  been  said,  was  a  constant  advocate 
of  bimetallism  under  an  international  agreement,  and 
on  May  2,  1894,  he  spoke  in  support  of  the  Lodge 
amendment : 

I  believe  myself  to  be  and  claim  to  be  a  bimetallist.  I 
know  that  there  is  a  difference  in  the  definition  of  that 
word.  I  know  that  my  friends  who  are  in  favor  of  the  free 
coinage  of  silver  by  the  United  States  alone,  do  not  admit 
that  any  one  is  a  bimetallist  unless  he  agrees  with  them  and 
supports  the  free  coinage  of  silver  by  the  United  States 
alone.  I  am  a  bimetallist  and  honestly  so  in  the  sense 
that  I  desire,  if  it  be  possible  with  safety  to  the  country, 
that  we  shall  have  free  coinage  of  silver.  If  that  be  not 
possible  I  desire  to  use  all  the  silver  that  we  may  safely 
use  in  this  country  as  a  legal-tender  money. 

The  difference    between  myself    and    those  who  insist 


i88  Orville  H.  Platt 

upon  free  coinage  by  the  United  States  alone  is  that  they 
believe  it  would  be  better  for  the  United  States  acting 
independently  to  adopt  the  free  coinage  and  use  of  silver. 
I  believe  that  that  would  be  more  disastrous  to  the  United 
States  than  to  pursue  our  present  policy  of  keeping  the 
silver  which  we  have  in  use  and  waiting  until  such  time 
as  the  world  will  engage  in  the  free  coinage  of  silver  or  the 
limited  use  of  silver. 

I  recognize  the  fact  that  all  that  stands  in  the  way  to-day 
of  the  free  coinage  of  silver  by  the  commercial  nations  of 
the  world  at  a  ratio  of  1 6  to  i  or  15!  to  i  is  the  attitude 
of  Great  Britain,  and  I  think  that  the  passage  of  this 
amendment,  passed  as  it  ought  to  be  by  both  sides  of  the 
chamber,  would  be  an  admonition  and  a  voice  which 
Great  Britain  could  not  refuse  to  hear. 

I  agree  to  a  certain  extent  with  those  whom  I  may  call 
my  silver  friends,  that  the  scarcity  of  gold  in  the  world 
for  many  purposes  has  been  productive  of  great  disaster, 
has  been  to  a  large  extent  responsible  for  falling  prices  and 
unremunerative  business.  Perhaps  I  would  disagree  with 
them  as  to  the  extent  to  which  that  cause  has  operated. 
I  have  no  doubt  I  should  disagree  with  them  in  supposing 
that  other  causes  were  potent  in  the  fall  of  prices  and  the 
unremunerative  character  of  business;  but  that  the  appre 
ciation  of  gold  and  its  ever-increasing  scarcity  for  money 
uses  have  to  a  great  extent  destroyed  values  and  made 
business  unprofitable  I  do  agree.  That  Great  Britain 
stands  directly  in  the  path  of  the  use  of  silver  and  stands 
there  almost  alone,  I  think  is  unquestionable.  Therefore, 
I  desire  by  the  passage  of  this  amendment  that  we  may 
do  something  which  will  convince  England  that  it  is  no 
longer  to  her  interest  to  stand  in  the  position  of  the  usurious 
creditor  of  the  world,  something  which  may  open  her  eyes 
to  the  fact  that  there  is  for  her  a  path  of  greatness  and 
prosperity  aside  from  the  mere  lending  of  money  and  taking 
the  interest  in  gold,  and  cheapening  the  prices  of  these  com 
modities  and  things  which  she  desires  to  buy  and  must  buy. 


CHAPTER  XV 

PAPER  MONEY 

Continued  Agitation  for  Free  Silver — Opposes  Fictitious  "Seignior 
age"  in  1895 — Criticism  of  the  Greenbacks — For  Sound 
Money  in  1896. 

OF  course,  nobody  of  political  intelligence  expected 
that  the  repeal  of  the  purchasing  clause  of  the 
Sherman  act  would  settle  the  silver  question.  The 
controversy  was  bound  to  persist  until  it  had  furnished 
the  compelling  issue  in  a  campaign  for  the  Presidency, 
and  until,  through  an  unforeseen  increase  in  the  produc 
tion  of  gold,  with  a  consequent  expansion  of  the  cir 
culating  medium,  it  became  merely  an  academic  dispute. 
The  friends  of  silver  would  not  acknowledge  defeat, 
nor  could  they  rest.  They  tantalized  jaded  industries 
with  one  and  another  alluring  bait,  seeking  fatuously 
to  tease  their  way  to  recognition.  It  was  only  a  little 
more  than  a  year  after  the  repeal,  at  a  time  when  no 
significant  financial  legislation  by  any  chance  could  be 
enacted,  that  the  Democratic  majority  of  the  Senate 
Finance  Committee  reported  a  bill  with  no  other  appar 
ent  purpose  than  to  play  for  political  position.  The 
bill  as  originally  introduced  was  to  provide  "for  the 
issue  of  bonds,  the  coinage  of  silver,  and  for  other 
purposes."  Under  the  merciless  pruning  of  the  Finance 
Committee  it  was  reduced  to  a  single  paragraph,  which 
meant  in  simple  English  that  any  owner  of  silver  bullion, 

189 


i9o  Orville  H.  Platt 

without  limit  of  quantity,  might  sell  it  to  the  United 
States  at  its  market  price,  receiving  for  it  silver  dollars 
and  certificates  issued  upon  the  silver  dollars,  and  that 
the  United  States  should  make  a  profit  of  the  difference 
between  the  market  value  and  the  coinage  of  the  silver 
which  it  purchased — a  fictitious  "  seigniorage."  The 
bill  was  defended  by  its  advocates,  but  there  was 
practically  no  argument  in  opposition,  until  Mr.  Platt, 
on  February  19,  1895,  took  the  floor.  He  declared  that 
of  all  the  measures  suggested  to  Congress  for  a  larger 
use  of  silver,  this  was  the  most  indefensible,  and  that 
"  of  all  the  foolish,  illogical,  impracticable  methods  for 
the  use  of  silver"  none  had  ever  equalled  it.  He 
declared,  moreover,  that  there  was  not  a  Senator  in 
the  chamber  who  really  wanted  the  bill  to  become  a 
law.  He  derided  the  so-called  "  seigniorage "  in  the 
bill.  The  provision  by  which  the  Government  of  the 
United  States  was  to  pay  for  the  silver  delivered  to  it, 
and  that  moment  have  it  worth  twice  as  much  as  it 
was  in  the  hands  of  the  seller,  was  not  a  seigniorage : 

No  government  in  the  world  has  ever,  to  my  knowledge, 
attempted  the  making  of  money  out  of  the  business  of 
coining  money  except  the  Government  of  the  United 
States.  It  would  not  be  tolerated,  I  think,  anywhere  else. 

If  the  bill  should  pass,  he  said  the  very  pleasing 
fiction  that  by  thus  dealing  with  silver  bullion  the 
Government  was  making  one  hundred  per  cent,  profit 
at  the  present  price  of  silver  would  disappear : 

It  will  prove  not  to  have  been  a  profit  at  all.  If  the 
time  should  ever  come  when,  by  reason  of  the  extent  of 
its  purchases  of  silver,  gold  and  silver  should  part  company 
as  to  value,  and  the  gold  dollar  should  become  more  valuable 
in  purchasing  and  debt-paying  power  than  the  silver  dollar, 


Paper  Money  191 

the  moment  that  occurs,  if  it  does  occur,  then  it  will  be 
seen  that  all  this  supposed  advantage  of  one  hundred  per 
cent,  profit  in  the  purchase  of  silver  was  not  a  profit 
after  all ;  and  the  loss  will  fall  not  upon  the  Government, 
not  upon  the  man  who  sold  the  silver  to  the  Government, 
but  upon  the  man  who  holds  the  coins  which  the  Govern 
ment  issues  in  the  purchase  of  the  silver,  or  which  it  coined 
after  having  paid  for  the  silver  and  used  it,  for  other 
purposes. 

He  acknowledged  that  he  was  a  bimetallist  and  ex 
pressed  his  belief  that,  if  we  could  have  an  international 
agreement  among  the  commercial  nations,  the  world 
could  use  as  money  all  the  silver  produced,  without  in 
any  way  impairing  the  value  of  the  silver  money : 

I  have  not  lost  hope  of  international  bimetallism.  I 
think  we  may  be  very  much  encouraged  at  the  present 
time  to  hope  that  international  bimetallism  is  a  thing  of 
the  not  very  remote  future. 

If  it  should  be  shown  that  England  and  Germany 
utterly  and  absolutely  for  all  time  refused  to  engage 
with  the  United  States  in  an  international  agreement 
for  the  enlarged  use  of  silver,  he  would  be  willing,  and 
would  advocate,  that  the  United  States  join  with  such 
commercial  nations  as  were  willing  to  engage  in  an 
international  monetary  conference  for  that  purpose. 

The  most  significant  passage  of  the  speech  was  that 
in  which  he  impressed  upon  his  hearers  a  few  whole 
some  truths  about  the  currency  system  of  the  United 
States,  and  outlined  what,  in  his  opinion,  would  be 
genuine  currency  reform.  His  conclusions  are  as  valid 
now  as  then: 

I  believe  the  vice  of  our  whole  financial  situation  lies 
in  our  paper  currency.  ...  I  regard  it  as  one  of  the  most 


i92  Orville  H.  Platt 

unfortunate  epochs  in  the  history  of  the  United  States 
when  under  a  supposed  and  a  real  necessity  we  departed 
from  the  ancient  methods  and  practices  and  customs  of 
the  Government  to  simply  coin  the  metals,  silver  and  gold, 
and  resorted  to  a  paper  currency.  No  country  ever  did 
it,  whether  the  paper  was  redeemable  or  irredeemable, 
that  did  not  suffer  for  it  in  the  end. 

When  we  resorted  to  the  greenback  I  venture  to  say 
that  there  were  not  ten  public  men  in  the  United  States 
who  claimed  that  it  was  a  sound  financial  measure.  The 
men  who  advocated  it,  the  men  who  insisted  upon  it, 
resorted  to  it  upon  the  plea  of  necessity  only,  acknow 
ledging  that  it  was  unsound  finance,  promising  that  when 
the  war  should  be  over  and  our  great  expenses  arising  from 
the  war  should  no  longer  have  to  be  met,  greenbacks 
would  be  retired  from  circulation,  never  for  a  moment  ad 
mitting  or  supposing  that  they  could  pass  into  our  financial 
system;  but  they  have  been  incorporated  in  our  system. 

In  addition  to  that  amount  of  paper  money,  the  green 
backs,  we  have  about  $480,000,000  of  silver  paper.  We 
have  in  this  country,  then,  about  $875,000,000  of  paper 
money.  That  money  is  responsible  for  the  growth  of 
paternalism  in  this  country.  The  people  from  coming 
to  believe  that  it  was  not  sound  finance,  that  the  only 
function  of  government  with  regard  to  money  was  to  coin 
gold  and  silver,  placing  the  government  stamp  upon  the 
metal  and  delivering  it  to  the  person  who  should  bring 
it  to  the  mint,  and  regulating  the  value  of  it,  have  come 
now  to  believe  that  in  some  way  or  other  it  is  the  function 
of  government  to  furnish  money  to  the  people,  to  believe 
that  it  is  one  of  the  functions  of  government  to  make  every 
man's  business  as  profitable  as  the  man  himself  shall  desire 
it  to  be.  It  is  the  inherent  vice  of  government  paper 
money  that  the  people  look  to  the  government  to  furnish 
them  with  money  and  to  regulate  the  money  of  the 
government  so  that  they  can  be  prosperous  in  their 
business. 


Paper  Money  193 

The  whole  country  has  become  demoralized  with  this 
idea  that  the  Government  may  properly  and  wisely  issue 
paper  money,  and  regulate  not  alone  the  value  of  money, 
but  the  value  and  conduct  of  all  business  throughout  the 
country  thereby.  There  never  was  a  more  fatal  govern 
mental  heresy  than  that  national  benefit  is  to  be  derived 
from  issues  of  governmental  paper.  .  .  .  Any  nation  that 
issues  its  promise-to-pay  as  money  has  embarked  on  a  road 
where  it  is  almost  impossible  to  turn  about,  the  end  of 
which  is  disaster  and  financial  distress  and  ruin. 

My  greatest  objection  to  the  use  of  silver  is  in  the  issuing 
of  paper  money  upon  it.  There  is  where  the  danger  lies. 
We  can  maintain  at  a  parity  with  gold  coin  all  the  silver 
coin  at  a  ratio  of  16  to  i  which  the  people  will  use  as  coin, 
but  I  firmly  believe  that  we  cannot  maintain  at  a  parity 
with  gold  all  the  silver  upon  which  we  can  issue  paper  money 
in  this  country.  .  .  .  One  thing  is  true,  and  that  is  that 
if  there  are  two  kinds  of  money  the  bullion  value  of  which 
differs  materially  the  cheaper  kind  will  drive  out  the  more 
valuable  kind  if  it  becomes  sufficiently  redundant.  That 
is  denied  by  no  one.  If  we  continue  the  purchase  of  silver, 
the  bullion  of  which  has  only  a  gold  value  of  fifty  cents  to 
the  dollar,  and  continue  putting  out  paper  upon  it  without 
limitation,  we  shall  finally  arrive  at  that  point  where  the 
cheaper  money  will  drive  out  the  more  valuable  money 
and  where  gold  will  go  to  a  premium.  .  .  .  You  can  use 
two  metals  of  different  bullion  value  together  to  a  certain 
extent.  If  the  United  States  Government  should  stamp 
41 2j  grains  of  copper  as  a  dollar,  receive  it  for  government 
dues,  make  it  a  legal  tender,  and  put  no  more  of  it  in  circu 
lation  than  was  fairly  required  for  the  payment  of  govern 
ment  dues,  and  to  meet  perhaps  the  views  of  some  few 
people  who  believe  that  the  stamp  of  the  Government  is 
all  that  is  needed,  it  could  carry  copper  dollars  of  41 2j 
grains  to  a  certain  extent  just  as  well  as  it  can  silver  dollars 
of  41 2j  grains,  when  the  bullion  in  the  dollar  is  only  worth 
half  as  much  as  the  gold  dollar.  But,  if  you  kept  that 
13 


194  Orville  H.  Platt 

process  up,  and  issued  those  copper  dollars  until  they  were 
vastly  in  excess  of  what  was  required  to  be  used  for  the 
payment  of  the  government  dues,  and  in  excess  of  the 
amount  used  by  those  who  believed  that  the  Government 
stamp  will  carry  anything  as  a  dollar,  when  the  amount 
exceeded  those  requirements,  then  those  dollars  would 
become  valuable  only  as  copper.  So,  if  by  this  system  of 
issuing  paper  upon  silver  you  get  into  circulation  more 
silver  than  is  required  for  the  use  of  payments  to  be  made 
to  the  Government,  and  up  to  a  point  where  a  majority 
believe  that  there  is  too  much  of  it,  then  the  silver  which 
the  paper  represents  will  be  valuable  as  silver  only.  .  .  . 

The  trouble  is  that  the  Government  has  gone  into  the 
banking  business,  and  no  financial  measure  which  does 
not  look  to  the  retirement  of  the  Government  from  the 
banking  business  is  going  to  be  of  anything  but  temporary 
avail.  When  we  settle  this  question,  we  must  settle  it 
upon  sound  financial  principles.  That  is  our  trouble  now. 
With  $875,000,000  of  paper  money  out,  $346,000,000  of 
which  is  directly  redeemable,  if  not  by  law,  by  our  customs, 
in  gold,  and  $155,000,000  more  of  what  are  called  "Sher 
man -purchase-act  notes"  which  have  also  been  treated 
as  being  redeemable  in  gold,  we  have  in  round  numbers 
nearly  $500,000,000  of  paper  money  to  be  redeemed  in 
gold,  and  in  addition  to  that  are  the  national  bank  notes, 
which  may  come  in  for  gold  redemption.  I  do  not  speak 
of  that,  however,  because  I  am  speaking  of  the  absolute 
government  paper  money.  What  does  that  involve,  Mr. 
President-?  It  involves  our  keeping  a  fund  of  gold  in  the 
United  States  Treasury  all  the  while  lying  idle,  until  demand 
may  be  made  upon  the  Treasury  for  redemption.  It  in 
volves  our  keeping  sufficient  gold  there  so  that  every  one 
will  be  satisfied  that  there  can  be  redemption  under  all 
circumstances. 

We  have  by  law  put  it  out  of  our  power  to  get  a  dollar 
of  gold  into  the  Treasury  except  by  borrowing  it.  Then 
comes  the  necessity  of  meeting  a  demand  for  gold  in  our 


Paper  Money  195 

foreign  payments,  and  so  the  gold  is  gradually  or  rapidly 
depleted  from  the  Treasury,  when  we  fill  it  up,  as  it  were, 
with  a  sufficient  reserve  fund.  This  thing  is  to  go  on 
forever.  So  long  as  our  present  system  of  paper  money 
continues  there  is  no  relief  from  it.  ... 

If  we  had  not  departed  from  the  old  system  of  coining 
gold  and  silver  for  the  persons  who  brought  it  to  the  mint 
and  in  paying  our  own  obligations  in  coin,  or  in  the  checks 
and  bills  of  exchange  which  make  up  so  large  a  proportion 
of  the  payments  of  this  country,  we  should  have  no  trouble. 
All  this  idea  that  the  people  have  a  right  to  depend  upon 
the  Government  through  its  money  transactions  and  its 
issue  of  paper  money  to  regulate  their  affairs  to  their 
liking  would  not  be  present,  and  this  paternalism,  socialism, 
and  populism,  latent  or  rampant,  would  never  have  got 
such  a  foothold  in  this  country  if  it  had  not  been  encouraged 
by  the  false  financial  system  of  paper  money  which  we 
have  inaugurated. 

I  know  that  in  the  minds  of  a  great  many  people  I  am 
talking  financial  heresy.  I  remember  when  I  first  came 
into  the  Senate  a  message  was  received  from  the  President 
in  favor  of  the  continued  retirement  of  greenbacks,  and  I 
saw  the  remarkable  spectacle  of  the  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury  recommending  that  there  should  be  no  further 
retirement  of  greenbacks. 

The  difficulty  with  this  question  is  to  get  rid  of  our  paper 
money  without  disturbing  the  financial  condition  of  the 
country.  That  is  a  serious  question.  It  requires  the  at 
tention  and  study  of  the  best,  the  most  careful,  and  most 
thoughtful  financiers;  but  that  we  ought  to  do  it  in  such 
a  way  and  as  rapidly  as  possible,  without  disturbing  the 
financial  conditions  and  dealing  a  serious  blow  to  business,  I 
have  not  the  least  doubt. 

This  road  of  Government  paper  issues  can  lead  only  to 
disaster  in  the  end,  and  the  worst  feature  about  this  bill 
is  that  it  goes  on  adding,  adding,  forever  adding,  to  the 
volume  of  our  paper  money. 


196  Orville  H.  Platt 

As  the  conventions  of  1896  approached,  Mr.  Platt 
became  greatly  concerned  about  the  currency  plank 
of  the  Republican  platform.  The  nomination  of  Mr. 
McKinley  was  assured  several  weeks  before  the  meeting 
of  the  Convention  at  St.  Louis,  and  those  who  had  his 
fortunes  in  charge  were  arranging  already  the  declara 
tion  of  principles  upon  which  he  was  to  go  before  the 
people.  Mark  Hanna  was  determined  that  the  issue 
of  the  campaign  should  be  the  tariff;  for  he  felt  that  his 
candidate  would  make  his  strongest  appeal  as  "the 
advance  agent  of  prosperity,"  just  as  he  had  already 
won  his  way  in  the  Republican  primaries  in  that  char 
acter.  Both  Hanna  and  McKinley  thought  it  would 
be  good  politics  to  minimize  the  currency  question  so 
that  the  Western  Republican  adherents  of  the  cause  of 
free  silver  might  not  be  driven  to  new  party  alignments. 
The  Eastern  leaders,  most  of  whom  had  been  supporters 
of  Speaker  Reed,  were  determined,  on  the  other  hand, 
that  there  should  be  no  evasion  of  the  currency  issue, 
and  that  the  party  should  place  itself  squarely  on  a 
platform  declaring  for  the  maintenance  of  the  gold 
standard.  It  fell  to  the  delegations  from  New  England 
and  New  York  to  make  this  fight,  and  Mr.  Platt,  al 
though  not  a  delegate  to  the  Convention,  exerted  his 
influence  in  behalf  of  an  unequivocal  declaration. 
On  June  nth,  he  wrote  emphatically  to  Samuel 
Fessenden : 

We  who  represent  States  like  Connecticut  here  in  Wash 
ington  feel  very  nervous  and  anxious  with  reference  to 
what  the  platform  shall  be  in  St.  Louis.  There  is  nothing 
that  I  can  urge  upon  you,  and  yet  I  feel  as  if  I  must  say 
something.  Here  in  Washington,  where  we  are  supposed 
to  catch  public  sentiment,  there  is  a  feeling  that  the  dele 
gates  who  will  apparently  nominate  McKinley  will  want 


Paper  Money  197 

to  tone  down  the  platform  so  that  it  may  not  be  entirely 
unacceptable  to  the  free-coinage  delegates.  I  cannot  help 
feeling  that  a  platform  which  can  possibly  be  interpreted 
as  favorable  to  silver  would  be  disastrous.  As  it  looks 
to  me  now,  we  have  got  to  fight  in  the  next  campaign 
Democrats,  Populists  and  the  bolting  silver  Republicans, 
and  we  ought  to  make  the  money  issue  plain  and  distinct 
and  unequivocal.  If  we  can't  win  on  such  a  platform,  let 
us  go  down.  We  can  at  least  lay  the  foundation  for  the 
party  of  the  future,  and  I  believe  that  we  can  carry  more 
States  on  a  square  sound  money  platform  than  we  can  on 
one  which  can  even  be  claimed  to  be  equivocal.  If  we  have 
an  equivocal  platform  or  one  which  any  considerable 
number  of  people  say  is  equivocal,  we  shall  get  no  Demo 
cratic  sound-money  votes.  If  we  have  a  square,  honest 
declaration  against  free  coinage  and  for  the  maintenance 
of  the  existing  standard,  we  shall  carry  New  York,  New 
Jersey,  and  Connecticut  by  very  large  majorities,  and  I 
believe  we  can  do  better  even  in  the  States  where  the  silver 
movement  is  feared  by  Republicans  than  we  can  upon  a 
hesitating  or  evasive  platform.  I  don't  know  what  the 
Committee  on  Platform  is  likely  to  do,  but,  if  it  does  not 
come  up  to  the  mark  which  we  believe  it  should,  I  think 
some  one  in  the  Convention  should  make  the  fight.  And 
looking  the  Convention  over,  I  don't  see  but  three  men  in 
the  Convention  who  can  make  it.  There  may  be  others, 
but  it  seems  to  me  that  the  fight  will  have  to  be  made  on 
the  floor  of  the  Convention  by  Warner  Miller,  Mr.  Lodge, 
and  yourself. 

I  hope  you  won't  think  that  I  am  unduly  frightened  or 
exercised,  but  what  I  have  heard  in  Washington  the  last 
few  days  has  induced  me  to  fear  very  much  that  our 
success  may  be  imperilled  by  an  attempt  to  placate  the 
free-coinage  Republicans. 

The  issue  was  joined  at  St.  Louis  under  the  leadershio 
of  Senator  Lodge  of  Massachusetts,  and  Thomas  C. 


198  Orville  H.  Platt 

Platt  of  New  York.  Mr.  Hanna,  greatly  against  his 
will,  was  induced  to  put  in  the  platform  a  straight  out 
declaration  for  gold,  on  a  threat  that  otherwise  the 
fight  would  be  carried  to  the  floor  of  the  convention. 
The  subsequent  campaign  was  conducted  almost  solely 
on  the  money  issue,  after  a  futile  attempt  to  force  the 
tariff  to  the  front.  Free  silver  was  overwhelmingly 
beaten,  and  the  way  was  clear  for  the  formal  legislative 
endorsement  of  the  gold  standard,  which  came  at  last 
with  the  Law  of  July,  1900. 


CHAPTER  XVI 

REAL  CURRENCY  REFORM 

The  Finance  Committee — Helps  to  Frame  Law  of  1900 — Letter  to 
Timothy  Dwight — Consideration  of  Additional  Measures  of 
Relief — Opposed  to  Asset  Currency — The  Aldrich  Bill — Con 
ference  at  Warwick — A  Central  Bank. 

COINCIDENT  with  the  election  of  President  Mc- 
Kinley  the  currency  question  assumed  a  new 
phase.  Hitherto  the  advocates  of  a  debased  coinage 
had  been  in  the  aggressive,  while  the  friends  of  a  stable 
currency  had  as  a  rule  contented  themselves  with 
resisting  the  encroachments  of  unsound  finance.  Now 
the  tables  were  about  to  be  turned.  In  the  winter 
succeeding  Mr.  McKinley's  election  a  group  of  business 
men,  financial  students  and  economists,  entered  upon  a 
systematic  campaign  with  a  view  to  securing  legislation 
which  would  insure  the  maintenance  of  the  gold  stand 
ard,  the  ultimate  retirement  of  all  classes  of  United 
States  notes,  and  a  banking  system  which  should  furnish 
credit  facilities  to  every  portion  of  the  country  with 
a  safe  and  elastic  circulation.  Hugh  H.  Hanna  of 
Indianapolis  was  the  intelligent  organizer  who  brought 
the  scattered  elements  together,  resulting  in  the 
Indianapolis  Convention  of  January,  1897,  and  the 
Monetary  Commission  convened  in  Washington  the 
following  autumn.  The  general  movement  of  which 
the  Indianapolis  Convention  and  the  Monetary  Com- 

199 


200  Orville  H.  Platt 

mission  were  conspicuous  manifestations  resulted  in 
the  enactment  of  the  Law  of  March  14, 1900,  and  in  an 
education  of  the  public  along  the  lines  of  sane  finance, 
undoubtedly  wholesome  in  effect,  although  accompanied, 
as  was  inevitable,  by  quixotic  suggestions  and  unreason 
ing  insistence  on  ideal  schemes,  impracticable  in  face 
of  the  necessity  for  legislative  compromise. 

Mr.  Platt  while  sympathizing  with  the  general  move 
ment,  did  not  allow  himself  to  be  carried  away  by 
enthusiasm  for  any  particular  remedy.  "I  am  not 
sure  whether  I  can  support  the  proposition  for  a  mone 
tary  commission,"  he  wrote  on  March  17 th,  1897: 

Ever  since  I  have  been  in  the  Senate,  especially  since 
the  Tariff  Commission  of  1882,  I  have  had  very  decided 
views  as  to  the  impolicy  of  commissions  appointed  outside 
of  Congress  to  formulate  legislation  on  given  subjects,  and 
have  frequently  taken  occasion  to  express  myself  in  the 
Senate  on  that  subject.  While  entirely  in  sympathy  with 
the  advocates  of  a  reformed  currency  system,  I  doubt 
very  much  whether  anything  is  to  be  gained  by  a  monetary 
commission.  If  we  make  commissions  for  one  purpose  to 
advise  Congress  what  to  do,  we  cannot  discriminate  and 
must  grant  them  whenever  there  seems  to  be  an  earnest 
demand  for  them.  It  amounts  purely  to  delegating  the 
power  of  Congress  to  investigate  and  formulate  legislation 
to  that  class  of  our  citizens  who  desire  the  legislation. 
And  while  that  might  work  well  in  case  of  a  monetary 
commission,  it  will  work  very  badly  in  the  end,  in  my 
judgment,  if  that  is  understood  to  be  the  policy  of  Congress. 
...  If  we  begin  with  commissions  we  shall  very  soon 
farm  out  legislation  into  the  hands  practically  of  men  who 
want  to  secure  it.  Saying  this,  I  do  not  conclusively  say 
that  I  cannot  favor  a  monetary  commission,  but  such  action 
is  against  all  previously  formed  convictions. 

He  was  then  a  member  of  the  Finance  Committee,  and 


Real  Currency  Reform  201 

was  in  constant  touch  with  Mr.  Aldrich  in  the  considera 
tion  of  all  measures  affecting  the  currency.  During 
the  summer  of  1899,  preceding  the  meeting  of  the 
Fifty-sixth  Congress,  there  were  conferences  of  members 
of  the  Finance  Committee  at  Narragansett  Pier  and 
Manhattan  Beach.  President  McKinley  in  his  annual 
message  impressed  upon  Congress  the  necessity  of 
enacting  a  law  to  insure  the  maintenance  of  the  gold 
standard.  The  Act  of  March  14,  1900,  embodying 
explicit  recognition  of  the  gold  standard,  was  the  result 
of  the  endeavors  of  the  Senate  and  House  to  come 
together.  It  was  a  long  step  in  advance  of  previous 
legislation,  but  it  was  not  by  any  means  the  ideal  scheme 
which  currency  reformers  had  in  mind ;  nor  did  it  fully 
satisfy  any  of  the  men  who  were  entrusted  with  the 
task  of  framing  the  law.  Mr.  Platt,  as  a  member  of 
the  subcommittee  of  the  Finance  Committee,  had  a 
great  deal  to  do  with  getting  the  bill  into  shape.  He 
joined  in  the  debate  with  the  free-silver  senators  who 
opposed  it  and  was  engaged  with  Mr.  Aldrich  and  Mr. 
Allison  in  bringing  about  an  agreement  in  conference. 
He  did  not  speak  at  length  but  in  the  course  of  the 
discussion  he  made  it  clear  that  he  believed  the  United 
States  could  take  no  step  more  likely  to  advance  the 
cause  of  international  bimetallism  than  to  let  it  be 
understood  to  the  world  that  until  we  could  secure  the 
concurrence  of  other  nations  we  were  going  to  maintain 
the  gold  standard. 

No  sooner  was  the  Law  of  1900  enacted  than  ad 
vocates  of  reform  began  to  pelt  the  men  responsible 
for  it  with  demands  for  legislation  still  further  ad 
vanced.  Mr.  Hanna  representing  the  monetary  con 
ference  had  two  purposes:  the  interchangeability  of 
all  forms  of  currency  and  bank  circulation  based  on 


202  Orville  H.  Platt 

assets.  As  a  member  of  the  Finance  Committee  Mr. 
Platt  received  numerous  letters  urging  his  co-operation 
in  these  projects.  But  he  was  not  inclined  to  hurry.  He 
thought  the  Law  of  1900  a  much  better  measure  than 
its  critics  would  make  out;  "not  that  it  is  perfect,  but 
it  is  easier  to  lament  imperfections  than  it  is  to  over 
come  them."  To  one  correspondent  he  replied  with  a 
suggestion  of  mild  reproof : 

I  wish  people  would  believe  that  those  who  are  respon 
sible  for  legislation  are  as  anxious  to  get  things  right  as 
they  are,  but  perhaps  see  more  of  the  difficulties  to  be 
overcome. 

The  venerable  Timothy  Dwight  of  New  Haven  wrote 
him  expressing  the  earnest  hope  that  the  Finance  Com 
mittee  would  finally  settle  the  currency  question  during 
the  session  so  that  there  should  be  no  further  possibility 
of  question  or  danger  as  to  the  permanent  establishment 
of  the  gold  standard.  He  also  inquired  whether  the 
time  was  not  ripe  to  adopt  the  measures  which  the 
Indianapolis  Committee  was  urging.  For  Dr.  Dwight 's 
opinion  Mr.  Platt,  a  friend  of  many  years,  had  a  pro 
found  respect,  and  in  reply  he  was  at  considerable  pains 
to  make  clear  his  own  position: 

I  assure  you  that  I  wish  to  do  everything  that  may  be 
necessary  in  order  to  prevent  the  possibility  of  the  gold 
standard  from  being  interfered  with.  The  suggested 
legislation,  however,  presents  many  other  serious  questions 
that  need  the  most  careful  consideration.  I  have  not  time 
for  a  long  discussion  of  the  subject,  but  right  in  the  be 
ginning  of  it  are  two  matters  to  which  I  will  allude. 

The  present  law  provides  for  the  redemption  in  gold 
of  about  $430,000,000  of  Government  paper,  greenbacks, 
treasury  notes,  etc.  For  this  redemption  we  thought  it 


Real  Currency  Reform  203 

necessary  to  provide  for  the  establishment  and  main 
tenance  at  all  times  of  a  reserve  fund  of  $150,000,000  in 
gold.  That  is  a  large  sum  to  lock  up  in  the  Treasury 
department.  If  a  law  is  to  be  passed  that  makes  all  our 
money  redeemable  in  gold,  it  will  add  to  the  volume  of 
money  to  be  redeemed  enough  of  silver  to  bring  it  up  to 
more  than  a  thousand  millions.  If  $150,000,000  was 
necessary  to  provide  a  safe  redemption  fund  for  $430,000,- 
ooo  of  paper,  I  cannot  see  why  $300,000,000  would  not 
be  necessary  as  a  fund  to  redeem  a  larger  amount,  and  to 
shut  that  amount  up  in  the  Treasury,  never  to  be  used 
except  for  redemption  purposes,  would  involve: 

First,  I  think  the  necessity  of  selling  more  bonds  to 
provide  for  it ;  and 

Second,  a  withdrawal  of  an  amount  from  circulation 
which  might  make  serious  trouble.  I  know  it  is  said  that 
it  would  be  necessary  to  increase  the  redemption  fund; 
that  when  it  was  once  provided  by  law  that  redemption 
of  the  silver  currency  would  be  made  in  gold,  nobody 
would  want  to  redeem;  but  that  argument  is  very  much 
along  the  line  of  the  greenbackers,  that  it  is  the  Government 
fiat  which  gives  value  to  currency. 

The  second  matter  to  which  I  allude  is  the  claim  that 
the  Government  should  provide  that  all  public  and  private 
debts  should  be  payable  in  gold.  In  other  words,  that 
it  should  declare  primarily  that  our  bonds,  which  on  the 
face  of  them  are  payable  in  coin,  should  be  payable  in 
gold  only,  and  that  all  obligations  of  the  Government, 
and  of  private  individuals  should  be  thus  payable.  The 
House  bill  which  came  over  to  the  Senate  contained  this 
provision,  and  it  also  contained  the  provision  that  the 
present  legal-tender  quality  of  the  silver  dollar  should 
continue.  I  do  not  see  how  it  is  practicable  to  provide 
that  all  obligations  of  the  Government  should  be  payable 
in  gold,  and  still  keep  the  legal- tender  quality  of  the  silver 
dollar,  and  there  is  certainly  an  inconsistency  in  saying 
that  silver  shall  be  a  legal  tender  to  pay  obligations  to 


204  Orville  H.  Platt 

the  Government,  while  the  Government  shall  pay  all  its 
obligations  in  gold. 

I  only  allude  to  these  two  matters  to  show  that  it  is 
much  easier  to  say  that  there  should  be  further  legislation 
for  the  security  of  the  gold  standard,  than  to  determine 
just  what  form  that  legislation  should  take.  There  are  a 
great  many  other  matters  connected  with  our  system  and 
its  practical  operation  which  furnish  difficulties  to  be 
thought  of  when  further  legislation  is  proposed.  Our  cur 
rency  is  pretty  safe  now  in  the  hands  of  officers  who  wish 
to  maintain  the  gold  standard.  No  law  that  could  be 
passed  would  make  it  safe  if  there  should  be  a  political 
change  which  put  the  Government  in  the  hands  of  those 
who  desire  to  destroy  the  gold  standard.  I  cannot  think 
that  with  all  the  delicate  and  difficult  problems  to  be  solved 
by  further  legislation,  it  is  wise  to  be  in  haste  about  it. 

In  other  letters  he  went  into  greater  detail.  It 
seemed  to  him  that  the  declaring  of  our  different  kinds 
of  currency  to  be  exchangeable  would  hardly  do  away 
with  the  necessity  for  a  gold  reserve. .  Simply  calling 
silver  money  gold,  or  as  good  as  gold,  would  not  make  it 
so.  Our  money  other  than  gold  would  be  greenbacks, 
treasury  notes,  silver  dollars,  and  silver  certificates,  and 
they  would  have  the  value  of  gold  simply  because  what 
is  gold  in  the  treasury  could  be  exchanged  for  them. 
It  was  true  that  the  people  did  not  want  their  money 
if  they  were  sure  that  they  could  get  it,  but  it  was  this 
very  fact  which  made  it  necessary  to  provide  what 
Tilden  used  to  call  ' '  a  central  reservoir  of  gold ' ' : 

There  is  not  and  there  will  not  be  as  long  as  present 
conditions  endure,  any  practical  difficulty.  The  country 
can  carry  this  paper  because  it  provides  a  sufficient  fund 
for  the  redemption  of  all  but  the  silver  currency;  and,  as 
to  the  silver  currency,  it  takes  it  in  payment  of  debts  due 
to  it,  and  the  volume  is  so  limited  that  it  is  thus  practically 


Real  Currency  Reform  205 

exchangeable  for  gold.  .  .  .  We  have  more  gold  in  this 
country  now  than  any  other  country  in  the  world,  and 
more  in  our  Treasury  than  any  other  nation  has  in  its 
treasury.  It  will  be  a  question  before  long  what  we  are 
going  to  do  with  it,  and  I  hope  that,  as  the  situation  begins 
to  emphasize  itself  to  the  apprehension  of  the  people,  a 
disposition  to  retire  all  our  paper  currency  will  make 
headway;  I  mean  all  paper  that  is  not  issued  upon  the 
deposit  of  an  equal  amount  of  gold;  in  other  words,  gold 
certificates.  I  think  the  whole  idea  of  paper  currency 
issued  by  the  Government  upon  any  other  basis  is  vicious, 
and  must  eventually  make  trouble.  And  yet,  the  popular 
business  sentiment  is  now  entirely  against  the  retirement 
of  our  paper  currency.  As  a  practical  measure,  the  green 
backs  cannot  be  retired  without  either  substituting  some 
thing  else  for  them  or  contracting  our  currency  to  the 
extent  of  their  retirement.  A  radical  contraction  of  currency 
would  plunge  us  into  all  sorts  of  financial  trouble;  that  is 
the  objection  to  taking  in  greenbacks  and  keeping  them 
except  when  someone  wants  them  in  exchange  for  gold. 
One  of  the  things  that  has  made  business  good  and  keeps 
it  good  is  the  fact  that  there  was  a  little  bit  of  expansion 
of  the  currency  in  our  last  financial  bill,  not  to  the  extent 
of  real  inflation,  but  an  expansion  which  kept  pace  with 
the  demand  of  business.  I  do  not  think  that  people  have 
generally  thought  of  that.  A  simple  declaration  of  the 
gold  standard,  without  providing  this  means  for  an  ex 
panded  currency  mostly  through  the  national  banks,  would 
scarcely  have  kept  things  as  satisfactory  as  they  have  been 
kept.  This  is  a  pretty  wide  question,  and  it  is  like  other 
great  questions  in  that  every  one  can  agree  on  the  purpose 
to  be  accomplished,  while  they  cannot  agree  on  the  details. 
It  is  easy  to  say  of  the  shipping  bill  that  it  is  a  measure 
calculated  to  restore  our  merchant  marine  and,  from  that 
standpoint,  every  one  wants  it ;  but  when  you  come  to  the 
question  of  how  it  is  to  be  done,  the  best  of  people  are  in 
doubt.  It  is  just  so  with  the  money  question.  Every  one 


2o6  Orville  H.  Platt 

agrees  that  we  should  do  everything  in  our  power  to  main 
tain  the  gold  standard,  but  when  you  come  to  consider 
the  special  steps  by  which  this  is  to  be  accomplished, 
people  may  well  be  puzzled. 

In  spite  of  the  pressure  from  business  interests 
nothing  tangible  was  done  for  over  two  years.  Presi 
dent  Roosevelt  in  his  message  of  December,  1902, 
suggested  the  desirability  of  additional  measures 

with  the  view  of  encouraging  the  use  of  such  instrumen 
talities  as  will  automatically  supply  every  legitimate  de 
mand  of  productive  industries  and  of  commerce,  not  only 
in  the  amount,  but  in  the  character,  of  circulation,  and  of 
making  all  kinds  of  money  interchangeable  and,  at  the  will 
of  the  holder,  convertible  into  the  established  gold  standard. 

After  waiting  sufficiently  long  upon  the  initiative 
of  the  House,  Mr.  Aldrich,  early  in  February,  1903, 
less  than  a  month  before  the  adjournment  of  Con 
gress,  introduced  and  reported  from  the  Finance 
Committee  a  bill  which  if  enacted  would  have  relieved 
the  situation  to  some  extent.  It  authorized  the 
Secretary  of  the  Treasury  to  deposit  in  the  national 
banks  public  money  received  from  all  sources,  including 
customs,  and  to  accept  as  security  certain  state  and 
municipal  bonds  as  well  as  United  States  bonds,  the 
banks  to  pay  not  less  than  one  and  one-half  per  cent, 
interest  on  government  deposits.  It  also  gave  to 
Panama  bonds  all  rights  and  privileges  of  two  per 
cent,  consols  deposited  as  security  for  circulation,  and 
authorized  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  to  retain  in 
the  general  fund  national  bank-notes  received  in  the 
ordinary  course  of  business  and  pay  them  out  in 
current  expenditures  of  the  Government. 

Consideration  of  this  bill  was  prevented  by  wanton 


Real  Currency  Reform  207 

obstruction,  but  it  served  as  a  text  for  subsequent 
discussion  and  contained  the  substance  of  future  legis 
lation.  After  the  adjournment  of  the  Fifty- seventh 
Congress  in  the  spring  of  1903,  the  Senate  leaders  felt 
that  the  time  had  arrived  for  an  understanding  if 
possible  in  regard  to  a  measure  to  be  enacted  during 
the  approaching  long  session  of  the  Fifty-eighth  Con 
gress.  A  conference  of  Republican  members  of  the 
Finance  Committee  was  called  to  meet  at  Hot  Springs* 
Virginia,  in  May.  Mr.  Platt  was  ill  with  an  attack  of 
acute  indigestion  and  could  not  attend.  Another 
meeting  was  held  at  Senator  Aldrich's  home  at  Warwick, 
Rhode  Island,  in  the  first  week  in  August.  Those 
invited  to  attend  it  were  Senators  Allison,  Spooner,  and 
Platt.  Mr.  Platt  felt  that  the  outlook  for  intelligent 
legislation  was  anything  but  clear.  Personally  he 
believed  in  the  establishment  of  a  Central  National 
Bank  as  a  sound  financial  programme,  but  he  feared  that 
the  time  was  not  ripe  for  proposing  such  a  measure  to 
the  country.  Writing  to  John  H.  Flagg,  of  New  York, 
on  July  29,  1903,  he  said: 

On  the  6th  of  August  I  go  down  to  Aldrich's  as  one  of 
a  subcommittee  to  consider  financial  matters.  Sometimes 
I  think  it  is  almost  a  farce  that  I  should  be  taking  part  in 
proposed  legislation  affecting  our  financial  system,  and  at 
other  times  I  think  perhaps  I  know  fully  as  much  about 
it  as  those  who  are  better  financiers.  This  present  con 
dition  seems  to  be  one  of  deciding  where  doctors  disagree. 
I  find  the  people  who  think  themselves  financial  experts 
have  many  different  schemes,  and  each  thinks  his  own 
scheme  is  the  only  way  possible  out  of  what  I  think  is 
universally  admitted  to  be  a  defective  governmental 
system.  I  doubt  if  any  of  them  point  the  way  out.  I 
agree  that,  if  there  were  some  way  of  making  a  more  elastic 


208  Orville  H.  Platt 

currency  without  running  the  risk  of  depreciating  its 
security,  it  would  be  a  good  thing  to  do,  but  I  doubt  very 
much  whether  issuing  an  emergency  circulation,  secured 
only  by  the  assets  of  a  bank  and  taxation,  would  be  a  real 
remedy  for  the  defects  which  exist,  or  indeed,  would  serve 
to  make  a  more  elastic  currency,  while  on  the  other  hand, 
it  is  possible  that  it  would  be  the  first  step  towards  what, 
in  old  times,  was  called  "wild  cat  banking,"  a  situation 
which  was  met  by  requiring  that  when  banks  issued  circu 
lation,  there  should  be  undoubted  security  behind  it.  I 
do  not  know.  I  am  all  at  sea  about  the  matter,  and  my 
only  consolation  in  that  respect  is  that  I  think  others  are 
as  much  afloat  as  I  am,  though  they  do  not  seem  to  know  it. 
A  greater  trouble  to  my  mind  than  the  want  of  an  elastic 
currency  is  that,  so  long  as  our  receipts  exceed  our  ex 
penditures,  actual  money  must  be  locked  up  in  the  vaults 
of  the  sub-treasury.  If  we,  in  this  country,  could  have  a 
national  bank,  or  a  governmental  connection  with  a  strong 
bank,  as  in  England,  France,  Germany,  and  other  commer 
cial  countries,  and  thus  do  away  with  the  sub-treasury,  I 
think  we  would  be  better  off,  but  that  is  impossible,  in 
view  of  public  sentiment.  It  is  strange  how  ideas  developed 
by  a  particular  situation  which  occurred  years,  and  even 
a  century  ago,  dominate  public  sentiment  now.  The  na 
tional  bank  idea  was  sound  finance,  but  its  experience  made 
every  one  opposed  to  a  national  bank,  and  you  have  only 
to  mention  one  now  to  stir  up  the  whole  community  to 
hostility.  It  is  just  another  instance  of  ideas  which  fitted 
one  set  of  circumstances  controlling  another  and  entirely 
different  set  in  after-times,  like  the  Alien  and  Sedition  laws, 
which  became  so  unpopular  as  the  result  of  political  party 
contention,  that  now  any  attempt  to  punish  even  the 
utterances  of  anarchy  is  howled  down  by  a  shout  about  re 
turning  to  the  old  Alien  and  Sedition  laws.  Any  attempt 
to  have  a  decent  army  is  met  by  the  old  cry,  first  raised 
in  the  time  of  our  Revolution,  as  the  result  of  hatred  of 
the  British,  that  a  standing  army  is  a  menace  to  our  lib- 


Real  Currency  Reform  209 

erties.  But,  however  all  this  may  be,  it  is  manifest  that 
we  cannot  revive  the  idea  of  a  national  bank.  The  re 
duction  of  taxation,  even  to  the  extent  of  making  it  neces 
sary  to  use  some  of  our  surplus,  is,  in  my  judgment,  the  real 
remedy  for  money  stringency,  but  that  is  difficult  of  accom 
plishment,  and  when  we  do  reduce  taxation  to  what  we 
suppose  is  the  level  of  expenditure,  it  turns  out  that  we 
have  still  a  surplus  of  moneys  that  we  cannot  use,  which 
must  go  either  into  the  sub-treasury  or  be  deposited  in 
banks. 

If  we  are  to  have  bad  times  our  receipts  will  fall  off,  and 
there  will  be  no  trouble  about  the  locking  up  of  money, 
but  the  banks  which  have  received  deposits  of  government 
money  seem  to  think  that  the  Government  must  not  call 
on  them  for  repayment,  and  so  we  are  in  danger  of  the 
deposit  in  banks  becoming  permanent.  I  confess  I  do  not 
know  what  to  do.  I  should  like  to  do  something  to  relieve 
the  situation.  If  this  Wall  Street  experience  is  the  be 
ginning  of  bad  times  in  business,  no  one  knows  what  the 
result  of  the  next  Presidential  election  will  be.  You  see 
it  is  a  serious  problem. 

The  conference  at  Warwick  went  into  the  subject 
of  currency  legislation  with  great  thoroughness,  but, 
in  view  of  the  conflicting  opinions  of  the  advocates 
of  a  reformed  system,  there  was  little  expectation  of 
affirmative  action  by  Congress.  It  was  understood 
that  Congress  was  to  meet  in  extraordinary  session  to 
take  up  the  question  of  Cuban  reciprocity,  and  this 
ought  to  give  time  for  consideration  of  financial  pro 
blems,  but  Mr.  Platt  did  not  feel  much  encouraged 
regarding  legislation.  Writing  to  Mr.  Flagg  on 
September  14,  1903,  he  said: 

It  looks  to  me  as  if  the  House  would  not  pass  any  bill 
whatever.  Fowler,  at  the  head  of  the  Banking  and  Cur 
rency  Committee,  has  evolved  a  scheme,  consisting  of  three 


Orville  H.  Platt 

propositions:  (i)  Retirement  of  the  greenbacks;  (2)  payment 
by  banks  of  two  per  cent,  interest  on  government  deposits; 
(3)  asset  currency.  I  do  not  believe  that  the  Republicans 
of  the  House  will  adopt  his  ideas.  I  do  not  think  his  plan 
has  many  advocates  in  banking  or  financial  circles.  I  need 
not  go  into  lengthy  argument  to  show  why  I  do  not  think 
it  a  wise  or  safe  scheme.  I  merely  say  that  I  shall  be  sur 
prised  if  it  meets  with  favor  in  the  House.  The  Secretary 
of  the  Treasury  has  a  cure-all,  in  a  plan  to  allow  national 
banks  to  issue  emergency  currency  up  to  fifty  per  cent, 
of  their  circulation,  secured  by  a  six  per  cent,  tax  and  a 
lien  on  assets.  I  think  that  would  be  a  dead  failure.  I 
do  not  believe  banks  would  take  out  that  currency.  It 
has  many  and  fatal  defects,  in  my  judgment,  even  if  they 
would.  We  shall  probably  propose  the  Aldrich  bill  with 
modifications.  .  .  .  Probably  we  could  pass  such  a  bill 
in  the  Senate  after  the  Democrats  are  through  trying  to 
formulate  an  issue  for  the  Presidential  campaign,  but  the 
necessity  for  an  additional  supply  of  money  to  move  the 
crops  will  have  gone  by  long  before  we  could  get  it  to  a 
vote.  The  Democratic  Presidential  campaign  is  of  course 
to  be  conducted  upon  the  theory  that  the  Republicans 
favor  the  great  moneyed  interests  of  the  country  at  the 
expense  of  those  who  are  poor  or  have  only  moderate 
capital,  and  any  effort  which  is  intended  to  relieve  the 
monetary  condition  will  be  said  by  them  to  be  a  part 
of  our  general  plan  to  build  up  the  millionaires  and  im 
poverish  every  one  else,  so  that,  though  we  may  pass  such 
a  bill  as  we  shall  probably  propose,  it  will  come  too  late  to 
be  of  service  this  fall,  and  then,  if,  as  I  surmise,  the  House 
passes  nothing,  that  will  be  the  end  of  it.  If  the  House 
should  pass  some  kind  of  a  bill,  we  might,  in  conference, 
get  some  items  of  minor  importance,  which  we  could  agree 
upon.  If  we  could  get  the  main  features  of  the  Aldrich 
bill  passed  by  Congress  quickly,  I  am  sure  that  it  would 
obviate  any  money  stringency  this  fall,  but  this  I  do  not 
look  for.  The  Fowler  plan  and  all  others  which  involve 


Real  Currency  Reform  211 

asset  currency,  taxable  or  untaxable,  look  to  the  complete 
change  of  our  currency  system,  and  it  seems  to  me  that  it 
would  be  folly  to  attempt  such  a  change  by  legislation  in 
this  Congress,  on  the  eve  of  a  presidential  election.  We 
have  a  safe  currency  now.  It  is  also  an  abundant  currency 
for  the  ordinary  conditions  of  business.  If  we  had  the 
two  additional  features,  permitting  deposit  of  all  receipts 
in  banks,  without  interest,  and  the  right  of  the  Secretary 
of  the  Treasury,  in  his  discretion,  during  times  of  stringency, 
to  waive  redemption  by  national  banks  of  their  notes, 
using  them  in  the  current  business  of  the  Treasury,  the  same 
as  greenbacks  are  used,  while  the  emergency  lasted,  we 
would  have  no  trouble,  but  you  can  see  as  well  as  I  the 
difficulty  in  reaching  any  such  conclusion,  as  this.  I 
should  not  be  surprised  to  see  the  session  go  by  without 
any  definite  legislation.  I  hope  that  something  may  be 
evolved  along  the  lines  I  have  suggested,  but  my  hope  is 
not  very  strong. 

Mr.  Platt's  doubts  were  justified.  The  President 
recommended  the  passage  of  a  bill  authorizing  the 
deposit  of  customs  receipts  in  national  banks — a  mild 
measure  enough — but  the  Congress  went  by  without 
action  of  any  kind,  owing  to  the  impractical  attitude  of 
the  members  of  the  Banking  and  Currency  Committee 
in  the  House,  and  the  Senator  never  had  another 
opportunity  to  participate  in  financial  legislation. 


CHAPTER  XVII 

A  STAUNCH  PROTECTIONIST 

The  Cleveland  Message  of  1887 — Attack  upon  the  Administration 
Policy — A  Comprehensive  Plea  for  Protection — Defender  of 
American  Industries — Opposition  to  the  Mills  Bill — Contrast 
between  Labor  and  Industry  North  and  South — The  Duty  on 
Tin  Plate — The  Tariff  not  Responsible  for  the  Trusts. 

PROTECTION  to  American  industries  was  one  of 
the  cardinal  tenets  of  Mr.  Platt's  political  creed, 
and  this  must  constantly  be  borne  in  mind  when  con 
sidering  his  course  in  legislation.  No  measure  which 
even  remotely  threatened  to  weaken  the  protective 
system  received  his  support  unless  on  careful  considera 
tion  he  concluded  that  some  greater  end  could  be 
advanced  by  its  enactment.  His  career  in  the  Senate 
embraced  a  period  during  which  four  measures  were 
formulated  there  involving  a  general  revision  of  the 
tariff,  and  several  abortive  attempts  at  tariff  legislation 
were  made  in  the  House. 

The  tariff  of  1883  claimed  his  attention  because  he 
was  the  representative  of  a  great  manufacturing  State, 
and  because  for  that  reason,  if  for  no  other,  he  would 
have  been  expected  to  see  that  manufacturing  interests 
did  not  suffer  at  the  hands  of  Congress.  But  he  was 
comparatively  young  in  the  service  then,  and  it  does 
not  appear  from  the  records  that  he  took  any  conspicu 
ous  part  in  the  deliberations  of  the  Senate.  He  had  no 
patience  with  the  theories  of  tariff  reform  which  about 

212 


A  Staunch  Protectionist  213 

that  time  agitated  American  politics,  but  there  was  no 
occasion  for  exploiting  himself  in  debate  and  he  con 
fined  his  activities  to  looking  after  the  interest  of  the 
industries  upon  which  his  State  so  greatly  depended. 

The  revision  of  1883  was  preliminary  to  a  general 
agitation  of  the  whole  tariff  question  to  which  the 
campaign  of  1884  contributed,  and  which  was  stimulated 
by  William  R.  Morrison  and  the  "  Horizontal "  bill  with 
which  for  a  time  he  beguiled  the  Democratic  House  of 
Representatives.  But  the  discussion  might  have  con 
tinued  for  years  to  have  little  except  academic  interest 
had  it  not  been  for  President  Cleveland  who  in  the 
middle  of  his  first  term  precipitated  the  issue  in  his 
annual  message  of  December,  1887.  The  question  then 
became  in  a  flash  the  most  vital  issue  before  the  Ameri 
can  people,  and  it  remained  so  until  the  enactment  of 
the  Dingley  la  win  1887  brought  industrial  contentment 
after  a  long  period  of  political  and  economic  unrest. 

The  message  of  1887  seemed  to  Mr.  Platt  what  it 
seemed  to  many  others, — a  wanton  attack  upon  a 
hitherto  accepted  American  policy,  entered  upon  with 
no  reason  then  apparent,  except  the  plain  political 
reason  of  furnishing  an  issue  upon  which  the  party 
then  in  power  could  go  to  the  country  in  the  hope  of 
continuing  its  predominance. 

During  the  winter  of  1887-8,  it  served  as  a  text  for  a 
general  tariff  debate,  introducing  a  controversy  which 
kept  the  industries  of  the  United  States  in  a  turmoil  for 
years.  Mr.  Platt  by  this  time  had  become  one  of  the 
recognized  authorities  in  the  Senate  on  industrial  and 
economic  questions,  and  this  was  a  subject  upon  which 
he  had  deep  rooted  convictions.  The  lines  were  form 
ing  for  the  contest  which  was  to  come  in  1888  and  which 
he  hoped  would  bring  Connecticut  back  to  the  Repub- 


2i4  Orville  H.  Platt 

lican  ranks.  He  could  hardly  have  kept  silence  if  he 
had  wished  to,  and  he  contributed  to  the  debate  a 
speech  which  occupied  in  delivery  a  part  of  two  days, 
February  6th  and  7th.  It  was  the  most  comprehensive 
argument  on  the  tariff  question  which  he  ever  under 
took,  for  although  in  later  years  he  came  to  have  a 
commanding  influence  in  the  shaping  of  tariff  legisla 
tion  he  left  to  others  the  discussion  of  principles  in 
volved.  It  was  an  orthodox  plea  for  protection  which 
exhibited  familiarity  with  the  discussion  preceding  it 
and  with  the  general  literature  of  the  subject,  as  well 
as  with  the  statistics  of  the  industries  likely  to  be 
affected  by  a  revision  of  the  tariff.  It  attracted  the 
attention  of  the  country  and  served  as  a  text  for  count 
less  other  arguments. 

With  the  straightforwardness  which  was  character 
istic  of  all  his  political  utterances  he  put  the  question 
bluntly:  "  Is  the  President  of  the  United  States  a  free 
trader  ? "  And  letting  his  argument  develop  from  that 
inquiry,  he  carried  it  on  to  a  far-reaching  defence  of 
the  doctrine  of  protection: 

I  do  not  propose  to  be  deterred  from  asking,  and  if  I  can, 
from  answering  this  question,  because  the  President  sug 
gests  that  "to  dwell  upon  the  theories  of  protection  and 
free  trade  savors  too  much  of  bandying  epithets. "  I  am  a 
protectionist  and  I  consider  it  no  epithet  when  I  am  called 
so.  If  the  President  of  the  United  States  is  a  free  trader 
he  ought  to  be  willing  to  be  called  so  and  not  consider  it 
an  epithet  if  that  word  is  used  to  define  his  position. 

The  immediate  timeliness  of  the  speech  did  not 
exclude  many  truths  which  were  of  permanent  applica 
tion,  as  applicable  to  the  discussion  to-day  as  they 
were  twenty  years  ago : 


A  Staunch  Protectionist  215 

Are  the  manufacturers  of  this  country  realizing  "im 
mense  profits"?  Are  they  the  millionaires  of  the  land? 
You  can  count  upon  your  fingers  and  thumbs  and  without 
counting  them  many  times  over,  all  the  manufacturers  of 
this  country  who  in  manufacturing  have  accumulated  a 
fortune  equal  to  a  million  dollars,  and  in  nine  cases  out 
of  ten  either  these  men  or  their  fathers  have  struggled  from 
the  bottom,  where  poverty  pinched  the  hardest  and  where 
privation  was  the  greatest,  up  to  their  success.  They  have 
been  workmen  at  the  bench,  at  the  loom,  in  the  factory,  in 
the  shop,  in  the  mill,  and  what  they  have  they  have  obtained 
in  a' manner  which  the  common  judgment  of  mankind  says 
is  honest  and  fair.  There  is  not  a  laboring  man  in  this 
country  who  when  he  comes  to  think  of  it  levels  his  claim 
that  men  are  obtaining  the  rewards  of  investment  without 
the  rendition  of  a  fair  equivalent  therefor  against  the  manu 
facturer.  No — they  are  not  the  millionaires.  Who  ever 
heard  a  manufacturer  called  a  "king"?  We  hear  of 
"cattle  kings,"  and  "wheat  kings,"  and  "iron  kings" — but 
you  never  hear  that  word  applied  to  a  manufacturer. 

He  warned  the  men  who  were  seeking  to  destroy  the 
protective  tariff  that  they  must  not  delude  themselves 
with  the  idea  that  they  were  aiming  their  blows  against 
New  England: 

The  New  England  manufacturer  is  the  man  who  has 
least  interest  of  all  classes  of  men  in  the  preservation  of 
the  protective  system.  He  is  interested  in  it,  indeed,  but 
others,  and  all  others  are  interested  more.  If  I  were  to 
name  the  order  in  which  the  different  classes  are  interested 
in  the  maintenance  of  a  protective  tariff,  I  would  say  first 
the  laborers  everywhere,  in  whatever  field  they  wipe  the 
sweat  from  their  brows;  more  than  any  manufacturers 
are  the  wage-receiving  men  of  this  country  interested  in 
its  preservation.  The  blow  hits  them  first  and  it  may  as 
well  be  understood,  and  they  are  coming  to  understand  it 


216  Orville  H.  Platt 

all  over  the  land.  First,  the  men  who  work  in  manu 
factories,  the  artisans,  are  hit;  next,  agriculturists  and  the 
men  who  work  on  farms;  next,  manufacturers  in  other 
sections  of  the  country  where  they  are  not  as  well  estab 
lished,  and  where  the  industries  may  indeed  be  said  even 
now  to  be  infant  industries;  next,  those  engaged  in  trans 
portation;  next,  those  engaged  in  merchandise;  and  last, 
and  least,  if  you  please — the  manufacturers  of  New  England. 
If  the  policy  of  free  trade  is  to  prevail,  if  our  progress 
is  to  be  arrested  and  our  development  hindered,  and  if 
the  inevitable  results  of  it  are  to  follow  and  we  are  to  have 
disaster  and  ruin,  the  first  men  who  will  emerge  from  the 
ruin  will  be  the  manufacturers  of  New  England,  the  first 
who  will  adjust  themselves  to  the  new  order  of  things  and 
go  on  once  more  as  they  have  in  the  past,  endeavoring  to 
build  up  and  develop  and  make  a  strong,  powerful,  glorious 
nation.  The  interest  of  the  New  England  manufacturer 
is  more  that  he  may  have  a  market  in  which  he  can  sell 
his  goods  than  anything  else.  That  is  what  he  wants. 
That  is  where  free  trade  hits  him  hardest — the  surrender 
of  our  market  to  the  foreigner. 

Then  he  took  up  the  argument  for  free  raw  materials 
which  at  that  time  was  just  beginning  to  appeal  to  the 
manufacturers  of  the  East : 

But  perhaps  as  favorite  a  method  of  attack  upon  the 
tariff  by  the  free  trader  as  any  is  the  claim  that  raw  ma 
terials  should  be  free,  and  why?  Because  the  free  trader 
knows  that  the  protection  of  raw  materials  is  the  keystone 
to  the  protective  arch ;  that  when  you  have  once  ceased  to 
protect  the  production  of  what  are  called  raw  materials 
in  the  country,  there  is  no  logical  ground  upon  which  any 
article  can  be  protected  here.  If  that  kind  of  production 
which  employs  the  greatest  percentage  of  labor  in  this 
country  cannot  receive  protection,  then  nothing  should 
receive  protection;  and  it  is,  therefore,  that  the  assault 
upon  protection  is  made  upon  what  are  called  raw  materials. 


A  Staunch  Protectionist  217 

It  is  more  than  that;  it  is  an  appeal  to  the  supposed 
selfishness  of  manufacturers.  The  manufacturers  are  told 
— told  by  the  President  in  his  message — that  they  can 
cheapen  the  cost  of  production  if  they  can  have  free  raw 
materials.  Sir,  the  manufacturer  who  seeks  to  obtain 
raw  materials  free  and  demands  a  tariff  upon  his  product 
is  a  selfish  man,  and  selfish  almost  to  the  point  of  criminal 
ity;  and  the  manufacturers  of  New  England,  as  a  class, 
spurn  that  bribe.  When  in  the  preparation  of  the  bill 
advised  by  the  leading  free  traders  out  of  Congress  in  this 
country,  the  proposition  is  made  to  purchase  the  support 
of  New  England  manufacturers  by  free  wool,  by  free  iron, 
by  free  coal,  I  tell  you  that  they  mistake  the  manufacturers 
of  Connecticut  and  the  rest  of  New  England.  They  know 
that  this  is  a  system  or  it  is  nothing.  They  know  that 
every  industry  must  be  protected  to  thrive  and  they  know 
that  protection  alone  can  make  us  generally  prosperous 
as  a  nation.  They  are  not  to  be  diverted  from  this  issue. 

The  only  raw  materials  are  those  which  grow  out  of  the 
earth  or  those  which  repose  beneath  its  surface.  The  mo 
ment  you  dig  out  the  iron,  and  the  coal,  and  the  copper, 
and  the  marble,  and  the  salt,  and  the  clay,  that  moment 
human  labor  is  added  to  the  natural  product,  and  from 
that  moment  it  is  no  longer  raw  material.  When  you  cut 
down  the  tree  and  begin  to  saw  it  into  timber  or  into 
boards  it  is  no  longer  raw  material. 

When  the  farmer  raises  or  buys  his  flock  of  sheep  and  pro 
duces  his  wool  by  means  of  his  labor,  that  is  no  longer  raw 
material.  Human  labor,  the  great  energizing,  civilizing 
force  of  the  world  and  of  humanity,  has  entered  into  that 
product.  I  would  not  put  it  too  strongly  if  I  were  to  say 
the  soul  of  man  has  entered  into  and  transformed  that 
natural  product.  It  is  no  longer  raw  material.  Go  into  any 
one  of  the  manufacturing  establishments  of  this  country; 
look  at  one  that  I  have  in  my  mind  in  my  own  State. 
In  that  factory  they  take  copper  in  the  ingot  as  it  comes 
from  the  mine  into  the  front  door.  When  it  goes  out  again 


218  Orville  H.  Platt 

it  goes  in  the  shape  of  copper  wire  of  four  one-thousandths 
of  an  inch  in  diameter.  Into  that  crude  copper  ingot  has 
passed  the  highest  thought  of  man ;  his  brain  is  in  the  wire — 
his  soul  is  there. 

In  the  course  of  his  speech,  Mr.  Platt  came  to  the 
question  of  the  surplus  which  had  ostensibly  moved 
President  Cleveland  to  his  sensational  and  radical 
recommendation.  To  the  thrifty  Connecticut  states 
man  the  existence  of  a  surplus  did  not  seem  to  be  an 
unmixed  evil  and,  indeed,  for  those  who  have  become 
familiar  with  the  Treasury  statistics  of  the  last  ten  years 
since  the  Dingley  law  went  into  effect,  it  is  difficult  to 
conceive  of  the  consternation  into  which  the  compara 
tively  meagre  accumulations  of  1887  threw  those  who 
were  entrusted  with  the  administration  of  the  Govern 
ment.  He  pointed  out  that  the  actual  accumulation 
in  the  Treasury  on  February  i,  1888,  was  only  about 
$35,000,000.  He  asked  why  this  accumulation  had 
been  permitted  if  it  were  such  an  evil : 

Why  has  taxation  not  been  reduced — the  taxation  which 
created  from  year  to  year  this  accumulation?  Why  has 
the  Democratic  party  in  power  in  that  section  of  Congress 
which  originates  measures  of  this  character  not  sent  to 
this  body  some  bill  looking  to  the  reduction  of  taxation? 
It  stood  pledged  by  its  platform,  by  the  professions  of  its 
leaders  on  every  stump  and  at  every  hustings  in  the  United 
States,  immediately  upon  its  accession  to  power  to  take 
steps  for  the  reduction  of  the  surplus.  They  misrepresented 
the  amount  of  the  surplus  in  their  presidential  convention 
of  1884,  as  I  will  show;  but  if  there  was  any  one  thing 
which  they  stood  pledged  to  do  it  was  immediately  and 
without  delay  to  adopt  measures  for  the  reduction  of  this 
surplus  accumulation  in  the  Treasury.  .  .  . 

What  reason  can  be  given  for  this  delay  in  the  past, 


A  Staunch  Protectionist  219 

what  reason  can  be  given  for  this  delay  to-day,  if  it  be  not 
that  the  accumulation  of  money  in  the  Treasury  and  our 
annual  surplus  income  are  being  used  and  deliberately  used, 
to  force  Congress  into  a  destruction  of  the  protective 
system  of  the  country? 

He  reminded  the  Senate  that  in  less  than  three  years 
we  had  a  debt  falling  due  of  $230,000,000,  and  asked 
why  the  administration  did  not  try  to  anticipate  the 
payment  of  that  debt : 

What  would  be  good  financiering  for  a  business  man  if 
he  had  money  on  hand  which  he  had  no  use  for,  and  had  a 
debt  falling  due  at  a  distant  date?  Would  it  not  be  to 
go  to  this  creditor  and  say:  "I  have  money  on  hand  which 
I  have  no  use  for;  you  have  a  note  against  me  falling  due 
in  future;  I  wish  to  make  some  arrangement  with  you 
whereby  I  can  take  up  that  note  now. "  Why  has  not  the 
Government  done  so?  It  would  have  made  money  by 
the  transaction.  It  will  make  money  if  it  will  adopt  that 
policy  now  instead  of  the  policy  of  allowing  the  money  to 
accumulate  in  the  Treasury  and  in  national  banks  until  the 
debt  falls  due.  .  .  .  Why  should  the  Government  insist 
upon  this  money  lying  idle  in  the  Treasury  rather  than 
attempt  to  anticipate  the  debt  of  the  Government?  If 
one  quarter  as  much  time  had  been  spent  in  attempting 
to  devise  some  fair  plan  by  which  an  arrangement  with  the 
creditors  of  the  Government  could  be  made  for  the  antici 
pation  of  the  debt  which  should  be  satisfactory  to  them 
and  profitable  to  the  Government  as  has  been  spent  in 
conferences  to  try  to  devise  some  scheme  for  striking  down 
the  industries  of  this  country,  that  arrangement  could  long 
ago  have  been  perfected. 

My  experience  in  life  has  taught  me — and  somewhat 
painfully  taught  me — that  it  is  not  a  pleasant  condition 
to  be  in,  and  that  it  is  not  good  business  for  a  man  to  be  in 
a  situation  where  he  has  no  money  in  his  pocket  except 


220  Orville  H.  Platt 

that  which  he  must  pay  out  for  his  daily  expenses.  That 
man  is  not  very  well  off  financially.  What  is  true  of  the 
man  is  true  of  the  United  States.  The  idea  of  reducing 
so  that  there  shall  be  no  money  in  the  Treasury,  depleted 
entirely,  run  from  day  to  day  and  hand  to  mouth,  using 
its  daily  receipts  to  meet  daily  expenditures,  is  a  policy 
which  is  entirely  unwarranted  by  any  sound  financial 
theory.  ...  I  would  expend  more.  I  would  have  a 
little  patriotism  instead  of  so  much  penuriousness.  I  would 
have  some  coast  defences.  I  would  not  be  longer  at  the 
mercy  of  foreign  powers,  at  the  mercy  of  England,  whose 
system  it  is  sought  to  engraft  upon  our  republican  insti 
tutions.  I  would  have  a  navy  built  as  if  we  intended  to 
have  a  navy,  and  not  in  the  pottering  way  in  which  it  has 
been  going  on  under  this  administration,  and  I  would  have 
reasonable  appropriations  for  internal  improvements. 

I  would  have,  even  if  I  do  not  think  very  much  of  our 
foreign  representation,  our  diplomats,  our  ministers,  our 
consuls,  enabled  to  represent  this  country  abroad  in  a  re 
spectable  manner,  to  say  the  least,  and  I  would  pay  them 
enough  so  that  they  could  do  so.  .  .  .  I  would  have  an 
American  policy,  and  whatever  was  reasonably  calculated 
to  extend  and  develop  and  foster  that  American  policy 
and  give  us  a  foothold  amongst  the  nations  and  respecta 
bility  everywhere  befitting  the  condition  of  a  free  Republic, 
I  would  spend  money  for. 

He  agreed  to  the  necessity  of  some  reduction,  but  he 
did  not  believe  in  the  reduction  of  taxation  on  the 
President's  plan,  which  in  his  opinion  would  result  in 
the  destruction  of  the  protective  system.  He  would 
have  made  the  reduction  elsewhere  than  on  manufac 
tured  articles : 

Why  not  reduce  by  repealing  internal-revenue  taxation  ? 
Because  the  protective  system  would  be  left  in  force  in 
this  country.  War  taxes!  There  is  one  tax  that  is  abso- 


A  Staunch  Protectionist  221 

lutely  a  war  tax,  and  that  is  the  internal-revenue  tax.  The 
tariff  tax,  if  it  were  a  tax,  existed  to  some  extent  before 
the  war.  .  .  .  The  war  tax  of  the  country  is  the  internal- 
revenue  tax.  Why  not  repeal  that  or  as  much  of  it  as  is 
necessary  to  get  the  required  reduction? 

It  is  a  tax  upon  our  productions,  be  they  tobacco  or 
corn.  It  is  a  tax  that  operates  unequally  and  yet  the  Presi 
dent  of  the  United  States  says  directly  that  no  one  objects 
to  that ;  and  this  great  accumulation,  this  surplus  of  money, 
must  pile  up  in  the  Treasury  rather  than  touch  the  internal- 
revenue  tax!  How  is  it  that  this  war  tax,  about  which 
we  have  heard  so  much,  has  all  at  once  become  so  sacred? 

He  asked  how  manufacturers  were  to  be  compensated 
for  the  loss  which  the  President  proposed  to  inflict  on 
them: 

They  can  get  cheap  raw  materials  and  then  he  says  they 
can  compete  with  other  nations  in  the  markets  of  the 
world.  The  poor,  pitiful  privilege  that  they  are  to  have  to 
save  them  from  ruin  is  to  go  away  from  their  own  country 
to  seek  markets  in  other  countries.  Foreign  trade  is  de 
sirable,  but  it  is  not  worth  obtaining  at  the  sacrifice  of  the 
trade  of  this  country.  The  trade  of  this  country  is  the 
marvel  of  God's  own  civilization,  and  to  give  up  any  portion 
of  it  in  the  hope  that  we  may  in  some  way  compensate 
ourselves  by  getting  the  markets  of  the  world,  as  they  are 
called,  is  the  height  of  folly  and  absurdity. 

Where  are  the  "markets  of  the  world " ?  Not  in  England, 
not  in  Germany,  not  in  France,  not  in  Belgium  or  Holland. 
We  are  not  going  to  sell  our  goods  in  England  or  the  other 
countries  I  have  named  in  competition  with  the  foreign 
manufacturers.  Freight  and  factorage  are  against  us. 
We  are  not  going  to  sell  in  lands  which  England  holds  by 
the  strong  power  of  her  army.  We  are  shut  up  to  South 
America ;  and  if  we  could  get  all  the  trade  of  South  America, 
it  would  not  be  6  per  cent,  of  our  home  market.  I  wish 
we  had  it;  but  the  idea  of  opening  our  ports,  taking  off 


222  Orville  H.  Platt 

our  tariff  duties,  letting  the  foreigner  flood  our  market 
with  his  goods,  and  then  telling  American  manufacturers 
and  American  laboring  men  that  we  can  compensate  our 
selves  by  going  into  the  markets  of  the  world  if  we  can  only 
have  reduced  duties,  it  seems  to  me  is  idle,  and,  of  all  free- 
trade  sophistries,  is  the  shallowest. 

His  concluding  words  were : 

Sir,  it  is  too  late  in  the  century  to  belittle  the  system  of 
protection  by  asserting,  as  the  President  and  all  other  free 
traders  assert,  that  it  lays  a  tax  upon  the  consumer  paid 
to  the"  manufacturer.  It  is  too  late  in  the  century  to  seek 
to  destroy  that  system  by  appealing  to  the  disquiet  of 
laborers  in  the  hope  of  arraying  them  against  it  because  it 
protects  alone  or  primarily  the  manufacturers  and  brings 
"immense  profits"  to  their  pockets. 

Protection  is  for  the  whole  of  United  America ;  its  benefits 
are  as  extensive  as  our  boundaries;  its  "immense  profits" 
are  as  widely  diffused  as  our  citizenship — it  blesses  and 
beautifies  every  home,  it  helps  and  strengthens  every 
citizen,  the  importer  of  foreign  wares  alone  excepted.  It 
is  the  policy  of  United  America  in  its  competition  with  all 
the  world.  Under  the  fostering  influence  of  that  system 
America  has  gained  its  rightful  place  in  front  of  the  grand 
procession  of  the  nations.  And  unless  we  blindly  permit 
a  Democratic  President  and  a  so-called  Democratic  party 
to  destroy  this,  our  sure  safe-guard  of  national  success, 
United  America  will  continue  to  lead  the  world  in  the 
grand  struggle  for  human  advancement. 

In  due  season  after  many  hearings,  Roger  Q.  Mills  pre 
sented  to  the  House  from  the  Committee  on  Ways  and 
Means  the  tariff  bill  which  bore  his  name.  The  bill 
occupied  the  attention  of  the  House  for  several  months. 
It  gave  William  McKinley  the  opportunity  for  recog 
nition  as  the  apostle  of  protection  which  ultimately 
made  him  President,  and  it  gave  Thomas  B.  Reed  the 


A  Staunch  Protectionist  223 

chance  for  leadership  which  made  him  Speaker  of  the 
House.  When  it  reached  the  Senate  an  enervating 
summer  had  already  laid  its  hand  upon  the  capital. 
The  great  national  conventions  were  impending,  and 
the  country  was  on  the  threshold  of  a  campaign  for  the 
Presidency  which  it  was  seen  must  turn  in  large  measure 
upon  the  issues  presented  by  the  Mills  bill  and  the 
Cleveland  message. 

The  Senate  Committee  on  Finance,  which  was  domi 
nated  by  a  Republican  majority,  consisting  of  Merrill, 
Sherman,  Jones  of  Nevada,  Allison,  Aldrich,  and  Hiscock, 
had  framed  a  bill  of  its  own,  along  protection  lines,  and 
this  was  reported  to  the  Senate  as  a  substitute  for  the 
measure  passed  by  the  House.  It  was  known  of  course 
that  no  bill  could  become  a  law,  and  the  debate  which 
followed  was  purely  for  effect  upon  the  approaching 
election.  The  discussion  continued  until  within  three 
weeks  of  the  election  day. 

There  was  little  for  any  member  of  the  Senate  to  do 
except  to  remain  in  his  place  to  contribute  to  a  quorum, 
to  vote  on  motions  which  required  a  record,  and 
occasionally  to  speak. 

Mr.  Platt  contented  himself  with  following  the  Com 
mittee  on  Finance,  interposing  an  occasional  question 
during  the  debate,  and  voting  with  due  regularity.  He 
made  only  one  speech  of  greater  length  than  a  few 
sentences.  This  was  near  the  close  of  the  session,  on 
October  n,  1888.  Then  he  discussed  the  issue  of 
protection  from  the  interesting  view-point  of  the 
development  of  labor  and  industry  North  and  South : 

Two  systems  of  labor  were  established  contemporaneously 
in  this  country.  About  a  year  before  the  Mayflower  touched 
the  Massachusetts  shore,  a  ship  landed  at  Jamestown, 
Virginia,  loaded  with  slaves.  From  that  time  these  two 


224  Orville  H.  Platt 

labor  systems  have  been  antagonistic  forces  in  the  country, 
and  all  our  woes  and  troubles  and  conflicts  have  been 
occasioned  by  the  "irrepressible  conflict"  between  these 
two  labor  systems.  One  system  involved  the  idea  that 
labor  should  be  unpaid  and  ignorant.  At  first  it  involved 
the  idea  that  capital  should  own  the  laborer,  but  always 
to  this  day  the  idea  that  labor  shall  be  poorly  paid  and 
ignorant.  The  other  system  involved  the  idea  that  labor 
should  be  well  paid  and  should  be  intelligent. 

The  Southern  system,  if  I  may  so  call  it  without  disrespect, 
was  based  upon  the  idea  that  the  laborer  should  have  no 
status  in  society,  that  he  should  have  no  political  rights, 
no  civil  rights,  no  "inalienable  rights."  The  other  was 
based  upon  the  idea  that  the  laborer  should  have  an  equal 
status  in  society  with  every  other  man;  that  he  should 
have  political  rights  and  civil  rights;  that  he  should  be 
one  of  the  citizens  of  the  Government,  responsible  for  its 
administration  and  responsible  for  its  progress;  that  he 
should  be  in  the  broadest  sense  a  freeman.  The  Southern 
system  where  the  laborer  was  unpaid,  where  he  was  kept 
ignorant,  where  it  was  a  criminal  offence  to  teach  him  to 
read  even  the  Scriptures,  was  adapted  only  to  the  rudest 
cultivation  of  the  soil.  The  Northern  system,  where  the 
laborer  was  well  paid  and  intelligent  and  free  to  engage  in 
the  "pursuit  of  happiness, "  inevitably  tended  to  the 
diversification  of  industries. 

These  two  labor  systems  determined  where  manufac 
tories  should  first  be  planted  in  the  United  States.  It  was 
not  the  enterprise  of  capitalists;  it  was  solely  and  purely 
the  character  of  labor  which  spread  over  these  different 
sections  of  the  United  States  which  determined  where 
manufacturing  should  spring  up  and  flourish.  The  New 
England  States,  where  this  labor  system  was  first  planted, 
could  but  attempt  to  engage  in  manufacturing.  The 
Southern  States,  where  the  ignorant  and  unpaid  systems  of 
labor  prevailed,  could  only  engage  in  the  raising  of  cotton, 
sugar,  tobacco,  and  like  agricultural  products.  Skill, 


A  Staunch  Protectionist  225 

education,  and  aspiration  in  the  laborer  not  only  make 
agriculture  profitable,  but  are  absolutely  essential  to  even 
the  rudimentary  development  of  mechanical  industries. 

To  have  supposed  that  manufacturing  could  at  that 
day  have  found  a  foothold  in  the  Southern  section  of  this 
country  was  to  suppose  that  you  could  reverse  a  universal 
law  of  political  economy. 

In  the  second  session  of  the  Fiftieth  Congress,  after 
the  defeat  of  Cleveland  by  Harrison,  the  Senate  con 
tinued  to  debate  the  tariff  bill  which  was  still  on  the 
calendar;  and  to  this  useless  debate  Mr.  Platt  contri 
buted  occasional  remarks.  One  brief  speech  which  he 
made  on  the  proposal  to  impose  a  duty  on  tin-plate  is 
interesting  by  reason  of  the  success  which  finally  re 
sulted  from  the  imposition  of  the  tin-plate  duty: 

I  want  to  vote  for  every  duty  which  will  establish  a  new 
industry  in  this  country — that  is  to  say,  an  industry  which 
under  any  circumstances  it  can  be  supposed  can  be  profit 
ably  carried  on  in  this  country.  If  employment  can  be 
found  for  70,000  additional  workmen  in  this  country  in 
the  manufacture  of  the  whole  or  a  large  portion  of  these 
283,000  tons  of  tin-plate  which  we  now  pay  our  money  to 
England  for,  I  want  that  opportunity  for  the  employment 
of  labor  to  be  satisfied ;  and  I  do  not  believe  that  this  duty 
is  going  to  result  in  any  great  increase  of  the  price  of  tin- 
plate;  I  think  it  very  doubtful  whether  it  results  in  any, 
if  the  usual  course  pursued  by  foreign  manufacturers  is 
adopted  by  them.  When  they  see  there  is  a  probability 
that  tin-plate  factories  will  be  established  in  this  country, 
they  will  put  down  the  price  quite  equal  to  the  amount 
that  is  added  to  the  duty;  and  even  if  the  price  is  tem 
porarily  raised,  all  the  experience  of  this  country  shows 
that  it  will  immediately  fall  to  or  below  its  present  price. 

On  another  occasion  he  considered  briefly  the  relation 
of  the  tariff  to  the  trusts: 

IS 


226  Orville  H.  Platt 

As  it  appears  to  me,  the  question  of  trusts  has  nothing 
whatever  to  do  with  the  question  of  duties.  It  seems  to  me 
that  the  righteous  indignation  which  exists  at  a  great 
many  trusts  in  this  country  (against  all  trusts  that  have 
the  features  which  make  them  obnoxious)  is  made  use  of 
to  attack  the  tariff. 

Trusts  are  not  indigenous  to  the  United  States.  The 
worst  trusts  are  to  be  found  abroad,  and  many  of  them 
in  England,  where  there  is  no  tariff.  There  is  not  a  worse 
trust  for  the  United  States  than  the  copper  trust  which 
exists  in  France.  There  is  no  trust  which  is  bearing  upon 
our  people  more  unfavorably,  more  injuriously,  and  the 
tariff  has  nothing  to  do  with  that;  the  rate  of  duty  has 
nothing  to  do  with  that. 

I  merely  rose  to  say  that  while  I  join  in  the  indignation 
against  those  combinations  which  put  up  the  price  of 
necessaries  of  life,  which  put  up  the  price  of  articles  that 
enter  into  general  use,  I  do  protest  against  this  continued 
reiteration  in  the  Senate  that  they  are  the  result  in  some 
way  of  protective  duties. 


CHAPTER  XVIII 

THE  FATEFUL  FIFTY-FIRST  CONGRESS 

McKinley  Tariff  and  the  Lodge  Elections  Bill — Democratic  Obstruc 
tion  in  the  Senate — An  Unswerving  Supporter  of  the  Party 
Programme — Argues  for  Enactment  of  Both  Bills — The  Quay 
Resolution — Enactment  of  the  Tariff  Bill — The  Election  Bill 
Postponed — Lukewarm  towards  Blame's  Reciprocity  Pro 
posal — Unchanged  by  Republican  Defeat. 

ON  the  assembling  of  the  Fifty-first  Congress  in  De 
cember,  1889,  the  Republican  party,  controlling 
both  legislative  and  executive  branches  of  the  Govern 
ment,  for  the  first  time  in  years  found  itself  in  a  position 
to  undertake  constructive  legislation.  First  among  the 
measures  to  which  the  party  had  pledged  itself  was  a 
revision  of  the  tariff  along  the  lines  of  protection,  next 
the  enactment  of  a  law  to  insure  the  integrity  and  purity 
of  Federal  elections.  In  order  to  fulfil  either  of  these 
promises  or  to  do  other  essential  things  it  was  necessary 
first  to  revise  the  rules  of  the  House  so  as  to  give  the 
majority  a  chance  to  do  business,  as  the  Democratic 
minority,  lacking  only  a  few  votes  of  control,  made  no 
concealment  of  its  purpose  to  prevent,  by  obstructive 
parliamentary  tactics,  the  enactment  of  all  measures 
which  they  did  not  like.  Speaker  Reed  by  heroic 
measures  early  in  the  session  effected  the  change  of 
rules  which  won  for  him  the  title  of  "Czar"  and  thus 
placed  the  House  in  a  position  to  carry  out  its  part  of 
the  political  programme.  The  McKinley  Tariff  bill  and 

227 


228  Orville  H.  Platt 

the  Lodge  Elections  bill,  taking  their  names  from  the 
chairmen  of  the  committees  which  reported  them,  were 
promptly  passed  and  sent  to  the  Senate.  There  the 
two  measures,  possessing  nothing  in  common  except 
the  stamp  of  party  regularity,  were  to  run  along  for 
months,  impeding  one  another's  progress  and  each 
threatening  the  other's  chances. 

On  April  24,  1890,  Senator  Hoar  from  the  Committee 
on  Privileges  and  Elections  reported  the  Elections  bill 
to  the  Senate.  Senator  Pugh  of  Alabama  for  the 
Democratic  minority  made  a  report  in  which  he  de 
clared  with  emphasis  that  the  passage  of  the  bill  would 
be  resisted  by  every  method  known  to  parliamentary 
law  and  to  the  Constitution.  On  June  i8th,  Senator 
Morrill  from  the  Finance  Committee  reported  the  Tariff 
bill  with  amendments,  which  was  in  effect  a  substitute, 
founded  on  the  measure  reported  as  a  substitute  for  the 
Mills  bill  in  1888.  The  Finance  Committee  had  the  same 
Republican  membership  as  in  the  preceding  Congress. 
Mr.  Platt  was  not  a  member,  though  by  long  service  and 
demonstrated  usefulness  he  was  close  in  the  councils 
of  Allison  and  Aldrich,  who  had  most  to  do  with  the 
initial  steps  of  shaping  tariff  legislation 

In  the  face  of  threatened  Democratic  obstruction, 
the  Republican  majority  was  concerned  chiefly  in  bring 
ing  the  bill  to  a  vote  so  that  it  might  go  into  operation 
well  in  advance  of  the  November  elections,  and  all  un 
necessary  speaking  in  defence  of  the  measure  was  to 
be  discouraged.  This  was  especially  agreeable  to  Mr. 
Platt  who,  following  his  usual  practice,  took  no  part  in 
the  debate  except  at  times  when  he  believed  he  could 
be  of  immediate  service,  and  the  Congressional  Record 
contains  no  report  of  any  speech  from  him  which  would 
occupy  more  than  fifteen  minutes  in  delivery.  He  did  no 


The  Fateful  Fifty-first  Congress       229 

talking  for  his  constituents ;  and  was  interested  solely  in 
seeing  that  the  bill  should  be  evolved  as  speedily  and  in 
as  favorable  a  form  as  possible.  But  he  was  solicitous 
that  the  two  great  political  measures  of  the  session 
should  become  laws, — as  much  concerned  about  one  as 
about  the  other, — and  for  a  long  time  it  looked  as  though 
the  Senate  would  be  able  to  come  to  a  vote  on  neither. 
After  the  farce  of  unlimited  debate  had  been  going  on 
for  several  weeks,  the  country  began  to  call  upon  the 
Senate  to  get  to  work.  The  press,  instead  of  condemn 
ing  the  minority,  which  was  responsible  for  the  delay, 
turned  its  batteries  upon  the  majority, which  was  doing 
its  very  best  to  bring  about  a  vote,  and,  coupled  with 
this  criticism,  illogically  enough,  was  a  wholesale 
denunciation  of  the  very  bills  upon  which  action  was 
demanded.  Mr.  Platt  was  kept  busy  explaining  to 
people  at  home  just  what  the  trouble  was,  and  he  did 
not  mince  words  in  upholding  the  policy  of  his  party. 
To  one  correspondent  who  had  written  him  a  com 
plaining  letter  he  replied : 

I  do  not  suppose  the  people  who  are  talking  in  opposition 
to  the  "  McKinley  bill "  as  it  is  called  have  any  very  definite 
idea  of  the  bill  as  a  whole. 

We  carried  the  Presidential  election  on  two  issues :  The 
one,  that  we  would  enact  a  protective  tariff  law;  and  the 
other,  that  we  would  endeavor  to  have  honest  elections. 
.  .  .  Now  what  are  we  going  to  do — abandon  the  idea 
of  protection  to  American  industries?  And  are  we  going 
to  abandon  our  opportunity  to  secure  fair  elections?  If 
so  we  need  never  again  talk  of  protection  and  honest  elec 
tions.  For  it  will  be  said  that  having  the  three  branches 
of  the  administration  and  the  opportunity  to  pass  laws, 
we  deliberately  refused  to  do  so.  ...  I  am  a  protectionist 
whether  in  public  or  in  private  life ;  and  I  can  not  abandon 


23o  Orville  H.  Platt 

my  lifelong  views  on  this  subject  whatever  the  result  may 
be   personally  or  politically. 

I  am  sorry  to  see  you  speak  of  the  "election  bill"  as  a 
"force  bill."  There  is  not  an  element  of  force  in  it  from 
the  beginning  to  the  end  of  it.  If  the  Republican  party, 
having  the  opportunity  to  enact  a  law,  the  sole  purpose 
of  which  is  to  allow  people  to  vote  in  Congressional  elections 
and  which  contains  no  element  of  force,  deliberately  de 
clines  to  do  it,  how  can  it  ever  again  complain  that  the 
nation  is  governed  by  a  party  which  exists  only  by  a  fraudu 
lent  suppression  of  votes?  And  what  is  the  Republican 
party  to  contend  for  if  it  abandons  these  two  issues  ? 

With  equal  frankness  he  wrote  to  William  C.  Miner  of 
Madison,  Connecticut: 

I  don't  see  how  or  where  you  got  your  idea  about  "reim 
bursing  interested  parties  for  money  advanced  to  the 
campaign  fund  of  '88  by  an  increase  of  taxes."  I  should 
not  suppose  that  such  a  fiction  was  seriously  believed 
anywhere.  ...  I  fear  that  you  have  been  giving  too 
much  heed  to  the  misrepresentations  persistently  and 
continuously  reiterated  in  certain  newspapers  that  seem 
to  think  the  country  would  be  better  off  if  its  industries 
were  crippled  here  and  transferred  to  other  countries.  .  .  . 
Financially,  socially,  morally,  and  politically,  I  believe 
that  protection  is  the  best  thing  for  Connecticut,  for  the 
United  States,  and  for  all  the  people  of  the  United  States ; 
and  so  believing  I  am  bound  to  support  it.  I  believe  too 
in  allowing  people  to  vote  everywhere;  and  when  it  is  a 
question  of  the  election  of  members  of  Congress,  where 
a  suppression  of  the  vote  in  any  State  is  a  direct  and  absolute 
wrong  to  my  own  State,  I  believe  it  is  the  duty  of  Congress 
to  provide  for  honest  elections  everywhere.  I  don't  speak 
of  any  particular  election  law.  We  have  a  law  now,  under 
which  marshals  were  appointed  at  the  last  Congressional 
election  in  Meriden,  as  well  as  in  New  Haven,  Hartford, 
Waterbury,  Bridgeport,  and  the  other  large  towns.  They 


The  Fateful  Fifty-first  Congress       231 

were  appointed  by  Democrats ;  they  did  n't  hurt  me  and 
they  did  n't  hurt  any  one.  And  I  know  of  no  reason  why 
such  a  law  should  not  be  extended  so  that  the  officers 
appointed  in  Connecticut  to  have  an  oversight  of  Congres 
sional  elections  can  be  appointed  in  the  States  where  the 
great  wrong  on  Connecticut  is,  I  believe,  perpetrated.  As 
to  the  details  of  the  bill,  that  is  another  question.  They 
ought  to  be  of  uniform  application,  and  so  guarded  that 
no  injustice  shall  be  done.  But  if  we  are  going  to  have  a 
republican  form  of  government,  we  must  have  honest 
elections. 

The  leaders  of  the  Senate  plodded  painfully  along 
while  the  critics  were  snarling  at  their  heels,  until  signs 
of  restlessness  began  to  show  among  some  of  those  who 
must  be  depended  on  if  the  party  programme  was  to 
be  carried  through.  A  little  group  of  Republicans,  most 
of  them  from  far  Western  States,  were  hostile  to  the 
Elections  bill,  believing  it  to  be  a  bad  political  move, 
while  others  representing  great  industrial  States  were 
ready  to  sacrifice  the  Elections  bill  or  any  other  measure 
in  order  to  insure  the  enactment  of  a  protective  tariff 
law.  One  of  these  was  Quay  of  Pennsylvania  who, 
after  the  Tariff  bill  had  been  two  months  before  the 
Senate,  undertook  to  open  a  way  for  its  passage  by 
offering  a  resolution  fixing  the  order  of  business.  The 
resolution  provided  that  during  the  rest  of  the  session 
the  Senate  would  take  up  for  consideration  no  legislative 
business  other  than  the  pending  Tariff  bill,  conference 
reports,  appropriation  bills,  and  certain  other  measures 
among  which  the  Elections  bill  was  conspicuous  by  its 
absence ;  the  consideration  of  all  bills  other  than  those 
mentioned,  to  be  postponed  to  the  following  session  and 
a  vote  on  the  tariff  to  be  had  on  August  3oth.  While 
the  resolution  was  never  acted  on,  its  mere  introduc- 


23 2  Orville  H.  Platt 

tion,  suggesting  an  arrangement  between  the  Democrats 
and  a  few  Republicans,  was  a  sufficient  indication  of 
what  was  bound  to  happen.  Mr.  Platt,  who  had  been 
urging  a  change  in  the  rules  to  fix  a  limit  to  debate,  took 
this  turn  of  affairs  to  heart:  "The  situation  here  in 
the  Senate  is  exasperating  beyond  measure,"  he  wrote 
to  A.  H.  Kellam  of  New  Haven,  on  August  i8th,  the 
day  on  which  Quay's  resolution  was  introduced: 

It  has  been  perfectly  evident  that  the  Democrats  have 
been  consuming  time  in  debate  in  every  possible  way  that 
they  could  devise,  short  of  laying  themselves  open  to  the 
charge  of  wilful  obstruction,  their  object  being  so  to  pro 
long  the  consideration  of  measures  that  the  Elections  bill 
might  not  be  reached  at  this  session.  Since  we  came  to 
the  consideration  of  the  Tariff  bill  I  think  they  have  laid 
themselves  open  in  its  discussion  to  the  charge  of  wilful 
obstruction.  With  no  rule  in  the  Senate  by  which  we  can 
limit  debate,  they  can  discuss  the  Tariff  bill  till  the  first 
day  of  the  next  session,  and  they  intend  to  do  it  unless  we 
will  bargain  with  them  not  to  take  up  the  Elections  bill. 
This  is  the  dilemma:  How  can  we  avoid  it? 

The  newspapers  say,  "Change  the  rules  so  as  to  cut  off 
debate."  Then  the  question  arises,  "Can  we  change  our 
rules?"  In  answering  this  it  must  be  understood  that 
we  have  ten  majority  in  the  Senate,  that  a  working  quorum 
is  forty-three,  that  we  have  one  Senator  (Stanford)  in 
Europe,  two  Senators  at  home  sick,  and  so  sick  that  it  is 
questionable  whether  they  could  come  here,  and  some 
Senators — variously  reckoned  at  from  three  to  six — who 
are  openly  opposed  to  the  passage  of  any  elections  law  and 
who  consequently  would  not  consent  to  a  change  of  rules 
when  every  one  knows  that  the  object  of  such  change  is  the 
passage  of  an  elections  law.  Again,  we  have  some  Senators 
who  don't  believe  there  ought  to  be  any  limitation  of  de 
bate  in  the  Senate,  who  at  the  same  time  are  heartily  in 
favor  of  an  elections  bill;  and  others  who  on  a  final  vote 


The  Fateful  Fifty-first  Congress       233 

would  vote  for  the  Elections  bill,  but  doubt  its  expediency 
so  much  that  they  would  join  with  its  opponents  in  opposing 
a  change  of  rules. 

But  suppose  this  difficulty  obviated.  The  question 
then  is,  can  we  change  the  rules?  The  Democrats  would 
then  insist  on  discussing  this  resolution  as  they  do  now  the 
Tariff  bill,  and  they  can  discuss  it  just  as  long  as  the  Tariff 
bill  unless  the  presiding  officer  of  the  Senate,  when  the  dis 
cussion  had  proceeded  as  long  as  the  Republicans  thought 
it  ought,  should  refuse  to  recognize  any  one  and  put  the 
question.  This  would  be  a  direct  violation  of  our  present 
rules.  It  would  not  be  the  situation  that  it  was  in  the 
House  on  the  adoption  of  rules,  for  the  House  had  no  rules. 
Our  rules  permit  debate ;  and  to  put  the  question  when  any 
one  desires  to  speak  would  be  an  open  violation  of  them; 
and  the  presiding  officer  could  not  do  it  successfully  unless 
he  had  a  majority  of  the  Senate  at  his  back  to  sustain  him. 
He  would  then  be  exercising  his  arbitrary  power  in  the 
interest  of  a  minority  and  not  of  a  majority.  Can  he  do 
that  and  be  sustained  by  even  the  Republican  sentiment 
of  the  country? 

If  then  it  be  conceded  that  the  rules  cannot  be  changed 
any  easier  than  the  Tariff  bill  can  be  passed  (I  don't  concede 
it,  but  I  think  most  of  the  Republican  Senators  do  as  a 
practical  question),  nothing  would  be  gained  by  dropping 
the  Tariff  bill  and  going  into  a  heated  contest  for  a  change 
of  rules.  What  then  is  to  be  done  ?  Two  courses  are  open, 
— first,  keep  at  the  Tariff  bill,  fight  it  out  on  that  line  if 
it  takes  till  the  4th  of  March,  and  throw  the  responsi 
bility  of  obstruction  and  delay  and  possible  failure  to  pass 
it,  on  the  Democrats.  This  is  what  I  think  we  ought  to 
do.  But  you  will  observe  that  no  Republican  newspaper 
criticises  the  Democrats  or  would  be  likely  to.  They  criti 
cise  the  Republican  Senators  with  a  sweeping  and  undis- 
criminating  criticism. 

The  practical  situation  leads  some  Republican  Senators 
who  honestly  favor  an  election  law  as  well  as  those  who 


234  Orville  H.  Platt 

are  opposed  to  one  to  try  to  bargain  for  the  passage  of  the 
Tariff  bill,  by  agreeing  to  postpone  consideration  of  the 
Elections  bill — and  that  is  the  secret  of  the  Quay  resolution. 
They  think  that  the  delay  and  failure  to  pass  a  Tariff  bill, 
in  working  great  injury  to  the  business  interests  of  the 
country,  creates  dissatisfaction  and  disaffection  among 
business  men,  and  that  it  is  better  to  assume  that  we  can't 
get  both  and  secure  the  passage  of  the  Tariff  bill  at  any 
sacrifice — even  by  an  agreement  with  Democrats  which 
virtually  means  the  abandonment  of  the  Elections  bill. 
I  cannot  go  with  them  and  I  will  not.  I  believe  if  we  had 
spunk  and  persistence  we  could  pass  the  Tariff  bill;  then 
we  could,  if  we  had  votes  enough,  take  up  the  Elections 
bill  and  honestly  try  to  pass  it.  If  we  failed  the  responsi 
bility  would  not  be  on  the  Republicans.  My  plan  would 
involve  staying  here  continuously  and  honestly  trying 
to  do  those  things  which  the  Republican  party  in  the  last 
election  decided  should  be  done.  To  purchase  the  passage 
of  the  Tariff  bill  by  a  bargain  with  the  Democrats  which 
involves  the  abandonment  of  the  Elections  bill,  I  regard 
as  a  weak  and  cowardly  surrender. 

If  the  Republicans  of  Connecticut  and  the  Republican 
newspapers  of  the  State  would  back  up  those  Republican 
Senators  who  are  trying  to  carry  out  the  wishes  of  the 
Republican  party,  and  attack  the  Democrats,  putting  the 
responsibility  of  delay  and  possible  failure  on  them,  the 
situation  would  not  be  as  embarrassing  as  it  now  is.  But 
I  ask  you  if  you  have  seen  one  word  of  vigorous  criticism 
in  a  Connecticut  newspaper  on  the  course  of  the  Democrats  ? 

Quay's  resolution  which  indicates  the  bargain  will 
probably  come  up  on  Tuesday,  and  I  presume  has  Repub 
lican  votes  enough  behind  it,  added  to  the  Democrats,  to 
pass  it.  But  I  wash  my  hands  clean  of  it.  It  will  probably 
give  us  a  Tariff  bill — but  acquired  at  what  a  sacrifice! 

The  programme  of  the  Quay  Republicans  prevailed. 
The  Elections  bill  went  over,  the  Tariff  bill  passed  the 


The  Fateful  Fifty-first  Congress       235 

Senate  on  September  2oth,  and  on  October  ist  became 
a  law.  The  bill  as  a  whole  Mr.  Platt  regarded  as  a  well 
constructed  measure,  and  he  struck  powerful  blows 
later  in  its  defence,  but  he  had  no  great  fancy  for  the 
reciprocity  provision  adopted  in  response  to  the  senti 
ment  aroused  by  Mr.  Elaine  in  his  letter  to  Senator  Frye, 
flung  into  the  controversy  after  the  bill  had  passed  the 
House.  His  opinions  in  later  years  were  somewhat 
modified,  and,  after  all,  the  reciprocity  proposed  by 
Mr.  Elaine,  and  limited  to  the  countries  of  South  and 
Central  America  in  its  practical  working,  was  quite  a 
different  thing  from  the  reciprocity  of  the  Dingley  bill 
which  embraced  the  commercial  nations  of  the  world  or 
the  reciprocity  which  ten  years  later  President  McKin- 
ley  hailed  as  the  handmaid  of  Protection.  It  had 
nothing  in  common  with  the  arrangement  with  Cuba 
which  as  a  matter  of  national  policy  and  square  dealing 
Senator  Platt  during  the  Roosevelt  administration  was 
instrumental  in  bringing  about. 

Though  he  did  not  oppose  reciprocity  in  the  Senate 
he  was  free  in  his  comments  on  the  newly  projected 
issue.1 

1  To  A.  H.  Kellam,  of  New  Haven,  he  wrote  on  July  19,  1890, 
what  he  called  a  few  "crude  and  tentative  suggestions"  on  the 
question  which  was  then  just  beginning  to  loom  on  the  political 
horizon : 

"I  notice  in  the  Hartford  Post  edited  by  Porter,  a  nephew  of 
William  Walter  Phelps,  a  little  article  to  the  effect  that  the  an 
nouncement  of  Elaine's  views  on  reciprocity  and  the  tariff  is  taken 
as  an  indication  that  he  is  a  candidate  for  the  Presidency  in  1892, 
and  if  so  would  be  put  there  by  a  phenomenal  majority,  and  all 
that  sort  of  thing. 

"So  far  as  I  can  learn  the  Blaine  pronunciamento  seems  to  have 
excited  more  interest  in  Connecticut  than  anywhere  else.  All 
this  question  of  reciprocity  trades  with  South  America,  Cuba,  and 
Canada  is  by  no  means  a  new  thing  Mr.  Blaine  has  no  patent 
on  it  any  more  than  he  has  on  the  Pan-American  Congress  which 


23  6  Orville  H.  Platt 

To  Lynde  Harrison,  of  New  Haven,  for  instance,  he 
wrote  on  August  23d: 

I  don't  know  what  will  be  done  in  the  Senate  about 
anything  looking  to  what  is  called  "reciprocity" — a  very 
taking  and  very  indefinite  word.  And  I  am  a  little  afraid 

was  strongly  recommended  by  Cleveland,  and  earlier  than  that  by 
Mr.  Frye.  If  anything  is  done  looking  to  trades  with  other  coun 
tries  on  sugar,  it  won't  take  the  line  of  keeping  the  present  duty  on 
sugar;  and  it  seems  a  very  queer  position  for  protectionists  or  free 
traders  to  take,  that  they  would  keep  up  the  high  duty  on  sugar  in 
the  hope  that  some  time  or  other  we  might  make  a  trade  with  some 
country  that  produces  a  little,  when  the  sugar  duty  is  one  that  is 
not  required  upon  any  principle  of  protection  and  when  taking 
it  of!  is  a  direct  benefit  to  the  people  of  the  United  States  of  fifty 
millions  of  dollars. 

' '  To  my  mind  the  only  way  to  reach  such  a  reciprocity,  or  rather 
trade  with  a  sugar-producing  country,  would  be  to  take  the  duty  off 
sugar,  and  then  provide  that  at  a  certain  time,  say  July,  1891,  or 
January,  1892,  it  should  be  restored  as  against  all  sugar-producing 
countries  that  have  not  in  the  meantime  signified  their  willingness 
and  agreement  to  take  certain  things  from  us  free.  Then  the  people 
would  get  the  benefit  of  free  sugar,  and  we  would  hold  out  an  induce 
ment  to  sugar-producing  countries  to  take  some  goods  free  from  us. 
In  other  words,  we  have  the  game  in  our  own  hands,  when  if  we 
keep  the  duty  on  sugar  in  the  hope  that  we  may  trade  with  them, 
they  will  have  the  game  in  their  hands. 

"The  whole  question  of  trades  of  this  sort  is  more  complicated 
than  it  appears.  In  the  first  place,  if  a  sugar-producing  country — 
Brazil  or  Cuba — has  a  treaty  with  foreign  countries  containing  a 
'most  favored  nations'  clause,  any  agreement  they  might  make 
with  us  would  have  to  be  made  with  all  other  countries  with  whom 
they  have  such  treaties.  In  the  second  place  there  is  no  telling 
if  we  should  enter  upon  such  a  policy,  where  it  would  end.  The 
parties  who  want  to  make  sugar  trades  say  that  there  is  no  prin 
ciple  involved  in  it — it  is  merely  a  business  arrangement.  But 
if  we  begin,  for  instance,  with  Brazil  on  sugar,  the  demand  will 
immediately  be  made  that  we  shall  extend  it  to  wool  with  the 
countries  that  produce  coarser  wools.  That  you  see  hits  the  wool 
producers  of  the  United  States,  with  the  probable  effect  of  turning 
them  against  the  protective  policy  of  the  country. 

"Again,  if  we  make  such  trades  with  reference  to  sugar  and  wool, 
why  not  with  reference  to  tea  ?  The  whole  western  coast  that  can 


The  Fateful  Fifty-first  Congress       237 

of  it  because  every  Democrat  and  Free  Trader  in  the  coun 
try  is  shouting  for  it  and  for  Blaine.  But  the  real  difficulty 
is,  first, — to  apply  it  to  sugar  and  not  to  wool  and  hides; 
secondly, — to  agree  on  what  articles  we  shall  trade  for  it. 
When  the  Mexican  and  Spanish  treaties  were  made  it 
turned  out  that  Connecticut  got  nothing;  that  is,  nothing 

trade  with  China,  perhaps  on  better  terms  than  any  foreign  nation, 
would  insist  that  we  should  put  a  duty  on  tea,  if  China  did  not 
agree  to  take  certain  American  products. 

"Again,  what  products  shall  we  insist  shall  be  taken  free  by 
countries  from  which  we  want  to  get  goods  free?  Shall  they  be 
confined  purely  to  agricultural  products?  Or  shall  we  go  beyond 
that  in  our  demands  and  include — say,  agricultural  implements? 
If  we  include  agricultural  implements,  why  not  other  manufactured 
products — cotton  cloth ;  and  if  cotton  cloth,  why  not  woollen  cloths 
and  machinery?  And  if  machinery,  why  not  carriages?  Where 
is  it  to  end?  Would  not  the  producer  of  articles  not  included 
in  the  trade  be  greatly  dissatisfied  ?  And  is  not  any  general  policy 
of  extending  our  trade  by  stipulations  with  certain  countries,  that 
we  will  take  certain  products  of  theirs  free,  if  they  will  take  certain 
products  of  ours  free,  the  beginning  of  breaking  down  the  protective 
policy  of  this  country? 

"Now  I  have  said  enough  to  outline  some  of  the  difficulties  which 
underlie  this  whole  question  of  reciprocity  trades.  I  mention  only 
a  few  of  them.  It  is  a  serious  question,  and  one  but  little  under 
stood.  It  has  a  certain  fascination  about  it  in  the  idea  that  through 
it  we  may  enlarge  our  trade  with  foreign  countries.  I  suppose  that 
the  entire  purchases  of  the  Central  and  South  American  States  and 
Cuba  combined,  amount  to  perhaps  five  hundred  millions  of  dollars. 
We  could  not  expect  to  get  it  all;  but  if  we  could,  it  would  probably 
equal  in  round  numbers  seven  per  cent,  of  our  home  trade.  If  we 
could  get  these  reciprocity  trades  with  the  western  nations  lying 
south  of  us  it  might  add  to  our  trade  an  amount  equal  to  two  or 
three  per  cent,  of  our  home  market. 

' '  The  question  then  comes  to  this — whether  it  will  be  worth  what 
it  will  cost.  I  have  never  been  quite  satisfied  on  this  point.  But  I 
am  clearly  satisfied  that  Elaine's  idea  of  keeping  up  the  duty  on 
sugar,  in  the  hope  that  we  may  be  able  to  make  a  trade  some  time, 
is  not  sound.  If  anything  is  to  be  done,  it  is  to  take  off  the  duty 
and  then  provide  for  a  restoration  of  it  as  against  those  countries 
which  in  a  specified  time  do  not  allow  us  reciprocal  advantages 
such  as  we  may  require. 


238  Orville  H.  Platt 

manufactured  in  Connecticut  was  included  in  the  list  of 
what  those  countries  would  take  in  consideration  of  our 
taking  some  of  their  products  free;  third, — it  would  give 
a  great  boom  to  the  idea  of  Canadian  reciprocity,  which 
is  all  against  New  England  interests,  especially  our  agri 
cultural  interests  along  the  border.  And  yet  I  think  the 
drift  is  toward  a  provision  that  if  by  a  certain  time  the 
countries  raising  sugar  do  not  accept  free  from  us  certain 
things  that  the  President  shall  ask  that  the  duties  shall  be 
restored.  We  got  nothing  when  we  made  coffee  and  tea 
free.  I  am  afraid  of  it — afraid  it  will  be  the  beginning  of 
the  end  of  the  protective  system.  It  is  very  fascinating 
as  I  have  said,  but  we  never  made  a  reciprocity  treaty  yet 
by  which  we  did  not  lose. 

Reciprocity  and  all,  the  McKinley  bill  had  a  rough 
time  when  it  came  to  be  passed  on  by  the  people. 
While  the  bill  was  on  its  passage  through  Congress  the 
Democratic  opposition  was  busily  engaged  in  fanning 
into  flame  the  discontent  which  is  an  invariable  accom 
paniment  of  every  revision  of  the  tariff.  The  cry  went 
up  that  the  new  rates  of  duty  were  prohibitive ;  that  the 
bill  was  framed  in  the  interest  of  the  rich  as  against  the 
poor;  that  the  workingman's  dinner  pail  was  heavily 
taxed ;  that  the  burden  pressed  cruelly  upon  the  family 
of  moderate  means.  Merchants  all  over  the  United 
States  in  every  city  and  village  arbitrarily  raised  the 
price  on  every  kind  of  commodity,  feeling  that  they 
could  safely  charge  the  increased  cost  to  the  increased 
rates  of  the  McKinley  bill.  In  numerous  instances  the 
bill  was  held  responsible  for  the  increase  in  retail  price 
of  articles  which  were  in  no  way  affected  by  it.  The 
women  of  the  country,  influenced  in  their  shopping  by 
the  outcry  against  the  McKinley  rates,  joined  in  it, 
to  the  consternation  of  political  leaders.  The  Repub- 


The  Fateful  Fifty-first  Congress       239 

lican  party  was  charged  with  reimbursing  campaign 
contributions  out  of  the  pockets  of  the  people ;  and  to 
swell  the  cry,  the  Democrats  South  and  North  bayed 
lustily  against  the  proposed  Federal  Elections  law, 
which,  borrowing  a  political  epithet  of  the  Grant  ad 
ministration,  they  had  dubbed  the  "  Force  bill."  The 
McKinley  bill  was  so  late  in  becoming  a  law  that  in  the 
few  weeks  preceding  election  its  real  character  could  not 
be  made  known  and  the  long  session  of  Congress  kept 
Senators  and  Representatives  in  Washington,  where 
they  could  not  explain  it  to  their  constituents.  The 
result  might  have  been  foreseen.  The  Republican  ma 
jority  in  the  House  was  overturned  and  for  the  last 
half  of  Mr.  Harrison's  administration  a  Democratic 
majority  of  almost  unprecedented  size  helped  to  thwart 
his  plans. 

Mr.  Platt  was  not  politically  blind,  and  he  recognized, 
as  did  others,  the  tendency  of  the  time,  but  he  sturdily 
refused  to  be  swept  off  his  feet  by  popular  clamor  and 
up  to  the  very  end  he  contended  stoutly  that  the 
McKinley  bill  carried  a  message  of  promise  to  American 
industries. 

Republican  defeat  in  the  November  elections  did  not 
discourage  him.  It  was  in  the  winter  of  1890-91  that 
his  own  re-election  was  pending,  but  fortunately  there 
was  no  Republican  opposition  to  his  return  and  he  was 
free  to  go  his  own  way  politically. 

To  a  Connecticut  member  of  the  House  who  had 
asked  his  advice  about  a  speech  he  had  in  contempla 
tion  the  following  winter  after  the  defeat  in  the  Novem 
ber  election,  Mr.  Platt  wrote  on  December  3,  1890: 

Of  course  I  don't  want  to  influence  you  against  what 
you  think  is  right  and  proper  ground  to  take  at  the  board 


24o  Orville  H.  Platt 

of  trade  meeting.  I  don't  believe  free  lumber  and  free 
coal  would  help  us  a  particle.  As  you  say,  taking  half 
of  the  duty  off  of  pine  lumber  has  raised  the  price  of  it.  I 
don't  think  the  taking  off  of  the  whole  duty  would  decrease 
the  price  at  all,  either  on  pine  or  spruce.  It  would  simply 
add  so  much  to  Canadian  stumpage  and  to  transportation. 
We  should  not  buy  Nova  Scotia  coal  as  against  American 
coal,  if  it  were  free.  We  might  possibly  get  American  coal 
a  trifle  cheaper,  but  I  doubt  that.  What  I  fear  is  the  giving 
aid  and  comfort  to  the  Democrats.  I  do  not  want  them  to 
be  encouraged  just  at  present.  They  will  twist  anything 
you  say,  if  it  is  in  the  slightest  degree  favorable  to  taking 
the  duty  off  from  any  raw  material  into  a  condemnation 
of  the  whole  protective  policy,  just  as  they  did  what  Blaine 
said  about  reciprocity.  The  first  step  in  the  Democratic 
free  trade  programme  is  free  trade  on  what  they  call  raw 
materials,  and,  if  they  can  get  any  one  to  advocate  that, 
even  as  to  any  one  item,  they  immediately  claim  a  convert 
to  their  doctrine.  We  have  trouble  enough  on  hand,  and 
my  idea  is  that  we  had  better  not  show  any  weakening 
anywhere  along  the  line  whatever  we  might  think  it  best 
to  do  in  the  future. 

To  the  end  of  his  career  he  never  wavered  in  his 

faith. 


CHAPTER  XIX 

THE  WILSON-GORMAN  BILL 

An  Aid  to  the  Finance  Committee — Mr.  North's  Experience — 
Active  in  Debate — Keen  Analysis  of  the  Democratic  Position 
— "Incidental  Protection"  Ridiculed — A  Deadly  Blow  at 
Farmers — Opposed  to  Free  Raw  Materials. 

THE  McKinley  tariff  was  doomed  to  a  life  altogether 
too  brief  to  demonstrate  its  effectiveness  as  a 
protective  and  revenue-raising  measure,  and  its  ex 
istence  was  confined  to  a  period  of  political  uncertainty 
which  placed  it  continually  at  a  disadvantage,  so  that 
its  real  merit  as  a  piece  of  constructive  legislation  will 
never  be  known.  The  Democratic  party,  which  got  its 
foot  into  the  stirrup  in  the  elections  of  1890,  vaulted 
into  the  saddle  two  years  later,  and,  having  made  its 
campaign  on  the  issue  of  the  tariff,  felt  compelled  at 
least  to  attempt  a  fulfilment  of  its  promise. 

In  the  abortive  tariff  legislation  of  the  Fifty-third 
Congress,  in  1894,  resulting  as  it  did  in  the  hybrid 
Wilson-Gorman  act  which  President  Cleveland  stig 
matized  as  a  work  of  "perfidy  and  dishonor,"  Mr. 
Platt,  as  one  of  the  minority  in  the  Senate,  was  obliged 
to  participate.  He  was  not  a  member  of  the  Finance 
Committee,  although  he  probably  would  have  been,  had 
there  been  a  Republican  majority,  as  Mr.  Hiscock's 
retirement  from  the  Senate  had  left  a  vacancy  among 
the  Eastern  members  of  the  Committee  to  which 

16  241 


242  Orville  H.  Platt 

Connecticut  might  reasonably  have  laid  claim.  But 
although  not  a  member  he  was  taken  freely  into  the 
councils  of  the  minority  members,  and  certain  schedules 
of  the  proposed  bill  were  turned  over  to  him  for  consid 
eration.  An  interesting  light  is  thrown  on  his  methods 
of  work  by  S.  N.  D.  North,  afterwards  director  of  the 
census,  who  came  closely  in  contact  with  him  at  this 
time: 

I  shall  never  forget  the  occasion  of  my  first  meeting 
with  Senator  Platt.  I  was  assisting  Senator  Aldrich  as  a 
tariff  expert.  Senator  Platt  sent  for  me.  He  said: 

"I  want  to  know  all  about  the  woollen  schedule.  At 
present  I  know  very  little  about  it.  I  wish  you  would  help 
me  out." 

We  sat  down  in  his  room  at  the  Arlington,  and  he  began 
asking  me  questions.  I  never  went  through  so  searching 
a  cross  examination  in  my  life.  There  was  not  a  detail 
of  the  schedule  that  he  did  not  want  to  know  all  about. 
Finally  I  was  compelled  to  cry  for  mercy.  I  discovered 
that  the  thorough  information  which  he  had  in  mind  to 
get  was  something  which  I  was  not  in  a  position  to  give 
without  further  preparation,  so  I  begged  for  time  to  look 
into  the  question  a  little  more  at  my  leisure,  and  then  I 
went  back  to  him.  He  resumed  his  cross  examination  and 
I  did  the  best  I  could.  What  particularly  impressed  me 
was  his  evident  determination  to  get  at  the  truth;  the  real 
reason  for  every  item  of  the  woollen  schedule,  and  the 
clearness  of  his  mental  powers.  He  had  a  marvellous 
memory.  When  the  bill  came  up  for  discussion  every 
question  he  asked  showed  that  the  knowledge  I  had  helped 
him  to  obtain  stood  in  his  mind. 

It  was  like  him  to  debate  more  freely  the  Wilson- 
Gorman  bill  to  which  he  was  opposed  than  any  one  of 
the  measures  which  he  favored,  and  in  the  framing 
of  some  of  which  he  had  an  important  part.  He  was 


The  Wilson-Gorman  Bill  243 

satisfied  that  the  various  paragraphs  of  the  McKinley 
and  Dingley  bill  should  be  put  on  their  passage  without 
controversial  contribution  from  him,  but  there  was  so 
much  in  the  Wilson-Gorman  schedules  to  which  he 
took  exception  that  he  threw  himself  into  the  combat, 
delivering  effective  blows  where  they  would  do  most 
good.  It  was  an  opportunity  for  exposing  the  fallacies 
of  the  Democratic  position  which  few  others  were  so 
well  qualified  to  take  advantage  of  as  he.  His  familiar 
ity  with  industries  and  schedules  and  his  forceful 
unadorned  manner  of  speech  rarely  came  into  more 
effective  play.  Of  his  work  it  was  said  at  the  time 
by  a  Connecticut  newspaper: 

Never  before  has  Senator  Platt  so  revealed  his  strength 
of  mind,  his  capacity  for  labor,  his  equipment  for  debate, 
his  sound  moral  basis,  his  warm  heart,  his  true  regard  for 
the  common  people  and  his  lofty  patriotism.  .  .  .  Sound 
judgment,  common  sense,  ready  wit,  pat  and  luminous 
illustrations  have  abounded  in  his  speeches  and  made  them 
wise,  interesting,  and  forcible.  .  .  .  He  has  especially 
pleaded  for  the  people  of  New  England,  and  in  doing  it 
he  has  shown  much  of  the  sturdy,  strongly  moral,  deeply 
thoughtful,  shrewd  humorous  qualities  that  mark  the  New 
England  character.  In  our  opinion  no  man  in  the  Senate 
has  done  so  much  work  in  this  debate  or  done  it  so  well. 

In  advocating  a  duty  of  sixty  cents  a  ton  on  coal 
instead  of  forty  as  recommended  by  the  committee,  he 
said: 

I  wish  the  Democratic  Free  Trader  could  get  the  one  idea 
into  his  mind  as  to  what  a  benefit  it  is  to  the  country  to 
have  all  our  work  done  here,  what  a  benefit  it  is  to  have  our 
wool  grown  here,  and  our  ore  dug  here,  and  our  coal  mined 
here,  rather  than  to  have  it  done  somewhere  else.  I  should 
suppose  that  the  underlying  patriotism  of  American 


244  Orville  H.  Platt 

Senators  would  get  the  better  of  their  party  predilections 
and  party  pride,  so  that  they  would  not  put  into  the  bill  any 
thing  which  would  strike  down  industries  in  this  country. 
I  stand  for  the  system  of  protection  because  I  will  not 
desert  the  American  laborer.  I  have  no  special  right  to 
call  myself  his  champion,  and  I  believe  that  the  continu 
ance  of  all  these  industries  in  the  United  States  by  American 
labor  is  the  salvation  of  our  civilization,  and  it  is  for  that 
reason  that  I  am  a  protectionist.  No  supposed  sentiment 
that  we  could  get  coal  a  little  cheaper  in  New  England  will 
for  a  moment  turn  me  from  the  plain,  straight  path  of 
protection,  which  a  man  who  acts  from  principle  and  not 
from  selfish  aims  ought  to  pursue. 

The  Wilson  bill  as  it  came  from  the  House  had  at 
least  the  virtue  of  consistency.  It  was  a  genuine 
tariff -for-re venue  measure.  Protective  duties  had  been 
ruthlessly  slaughtered.  By  the  time  it  had  come  from 
under  its  treatment  at  the  hands  of  the  Senate  Com 
mittee  it  had  lost  even  this  merit.  Higher  duties  had 
been  restored  here  and  there  at  the  demand  of  Demo 
cratic  Senators  interested  in  certain  industries  until  the 
original  measure  was  hardly  recognizable.  But  the 
remodelling  had  not  been  in  accordance  with  any 
economic  plan.  Mr.  Platt  declared  the  difference 
between  the  two  bills  to  be  like  the  difference  between 
electrocution  and  death  by  slow  poison: 

The  one  is  sudden  and  painless  as  the  death  of  industries 
would  have  been  under  the  Wilson  bill;  the  other  is  tor 
turing  and  lingering  as  the  death  of  industries  will  be 
under  the  bill  which  we  are  now  considering,  should  it 
become  a  law.  .  .  . 

This  is  not  a  protective  bill.  It  is  not  in  any  sense  a 
recognition  of  the  doctrine  of  protection  high  or  low.  It 
is  not  a  bill  for  revenue  with  incidental  protection.  It  is 


The  Wilson-Gorman  Bill  245 

a  bill  (and  the  truth  may  as  well  be  told  in  the  Senate  of 
the  United  States)  which  proceeds  upon  free-trade  prin 
ciples  except  as  to  such  articles  as  it  has  been  necessary 
to  levy  protective  duties  upon  to  get  the  votes  of  Democratic 
Senators  to  pass  the  bill.  I  insist  that  never  before  in  the 
history  of  this  country  has  such  a  spectacle  been  presented 
in  either  branch  of  the  National  Legislature,  and  I  pray  to 
God  it  may  never  occur  again. 

The  bill  as  it  came  from  the  House  of  Representatives 
was  mainly  free  from  such  a  charge,  but  reaching  here  it 
was  discovered  that  there  was  not  a  majority  upon  the 
Democratic  side  of  the  chamber  to  pass  it.  There  was  a 
body  of  Conservatives,  as  they  were  called,  estimated  at 
from  five  to  fifteen,  who  were  charged  all  over  the  country 
in  Democratic  newspapers  with  being  traitors  to  the  Demo 
cratic  party,  and  in  great  head-lines  Democratic  newspapers 
called  upon  the  Democrats  in  the  Senate  who  stood  by  the 
Chicago  platform  and  proposed  to  pass  a  tariff  bill,  which 
should  not  be  objectionable  to  the  charge  that  it  was  rob 
bery,  to  read  the  Conservatives  out  of  the  party.  It  was 
more  of  a  task  than  the  majority  of  the  Democratic  Senators 
desired  to  undertake.  Consequently  they  surrendered  to 
these  conservatives,  and  the  price  of  their  votes  appears 
in  the  protective  duties  which  the  bill  contains;  and  there 
are  no  other  protective  duties  in  it.  ... 

It  is  strange,  passing  strange,  that  Senators  who  say  they 
do  not  believe  in  protection,  that  Senators  who  say  that  the 
McKinley  bill  was  the  most  infamous  measure  that  was 
ever  passed,  should  be  found  voting  for  duties  equivalent  to 
the  McKinley  rates  upon  some  of  those  matters  which 
most  closely  touch  and  affect  the  interests  of  the  people 
of  the  United  States.  No  such  marvel  has  ever  been  seen 
under  the  sun  as  all  the  Democratic  Senators,  with  the 
possible  exception  of  the  Senator  from  Texas  (Mr.  Mills), 
giving  way  to  this  demand  of  the  sugar  trust.  How  this 
chamber  has  rung  with  denunciations  of  the  sugar  trust! 
How  the  ears  of  waiting  and  listening  multitudes  in 


246  Orville  H.  Platt 

Democratic  political  meetings  have  been  vexed  with  reit 
erated  denunciations  of  this  sugar  trust!  And  here  every 
Democratic  Senator,  with  one  exception,  is  ready  to  vote 
for  a  prohibitive  duty  upon  refined  sugar! 

He  ridiculed  the  idea  of  "  incidental  protection " 
which  Democrats  looking  for  an  excuse  to  impose 
duties  on  their  own  pet  products  made  much  of.  He 
declared  that  there  was  no  such  principle : 

If  by  incidental  protection  you  mean  that  the  metal 
working  industries  of  Connecticut  and  the  other  Eastern 
States  are  to  be  absolutely  slaughtered  and  destroyed  by 
the  bill  and  that  the  sugar  trust  is  to  have  a  prohibitive 
duty  upon  refined  sugar,  you  will  find  plenty  of  it  in  the  bill ; 
but  I  had  not  supposed  that  was  the  doctrine  of  the  Demo 
cratic  party.  If  you  would  make  duties  all  along  the  bill 
protective,  there  would  be  no  " incidental"  protection  in 
it;  it  would  be  "deliberate"  protection.  If  you  reduce  the 
duties  all  along  the  bill  below  the  protective  point,  there 
will  be  no  "incidental"  protection.  You  cannot  so  con 
struct  a  bill;  it  is  impossible.  You  might  as  well  attempt 
to  have  two  and  two  make  five  as  to  construct  a  bill  upon 
the  principle  that  you  will  impose  duties  for  revenue, 
which,  while  they  do  not  protect,  carry  incidental  pro 
tection  with  them. 

He  turned  against  the  majority  their  own  argument 
that  the  American  consumer  pays  the  protective  tariff 
tax.  It  was  estimated  that  the  bill  carried  a  reduction 
of  thirty-one  per  cent,  in  duties.  Then,  from  the  stand 
point  of  a  tariff  reformer,  he  pointed  out  the  value  of  all 
goods  on  hand  at  the  time  the  bill  was  to  take  effect 
would  be  reduced  thirty-one  per  cent. — practically  one 
third.  It  might  be  all  very  well  to  punish  the  manu 
facturers  but  why  punish  the  merchants  ?  In  the  de 
nunciation  of  protection  he  had  never  heard  anything 


The  Wilson-Gorman  Bill  247 

about  the  "  robber  merchant."  It  had  always  been 
the  "  robber  manufacturer  "  upon  whose  head  the  vials 
of  wrath  had  been  poured. 

The  proposed  legislation  he  declared  to  be  a  crime. 
On  the  eighth  day  of  November,  1892,  every  man  in 
the  United  States  who  was  willing  to  work  could  find 
employment  at  remunerative  wages.  The  "  army  of 
peace"  was  better  fed,  better  clothed,  better  housed 
than  the  workingmen  of  any  other  nation  or  of  any 
previous  time : 

Now,  the  very  threat  of  the  passage  of  this  bill  has 
changed  all.  The  men  who  are  coming  to  the  capital  of 
the  United  States  to  present  petitions — if  they  are  as 
represented  to  be,  peaceful  and  peaceable  citizens,  not 
tramps  or  vagrants,  "  Coxey's  Army" — are  men  who  on 
the  eighth  day  of  November,  1892,  were  at  work  at  good 
wages,  and  the  very  threat  of  the  passage  of  this  bill,  among 
other  dire  results,  has  reduced  them  to  the  condition  of  the 
unemployed.  I  say  that  to  adopt  a  policy  which  throws 
the  citizens  of  the  Republic  into  necessary  idleness  is  a 
crime;  and  no  greater  crime  can  be  devised  against  the 
Republic  than  that.  .  .  . 

I  would  not  indulge  in  class  legislation.  I  do  not  be 
lieve  under  our  Constitution  and  under  our  system  that  we 
can  provide  work  directly  by  the  Government  for  the 
citizen  who  is  unemployed;  but  I  do  believe  that  when 
two  systems  of  finance  are  presented  to  the  country,  and 
one  of  them  will  give  employment  at  remunerative  wages 
to  all  our  people,  and  the  other  will  deprive  our  people  of 
work  and  force  them  into  the  great  army  of  the  unemployed, 
it  is  not  only  folly,  but  criminality,  which  adopts  that  system 
which  must  fill  the  streets  of  our  cities  and  the  highways 
of  our  agricultural  community  with  idle  men  who  have 
no  means  of  support.  .  .  . 

We  managed  from  1890  to  1893  to  keep  all  our  people 


248  Orville  H.  Platt 

employed ;  we  furnished  work  even  for  those  who  came  from 
foreign  countries  to  these  shores  to  better  their  condition; 
but  when  we  adopt  a  bill,  the  purpose  of  which  and  the 
avowed  object  of  which  is  to  buy  goods  in  foreign  countries, 
because,  as  is  supposed,  they  can  be  bought  cheaper  there 
than  here,  then  we  displace  so  much  labor  in  this  country. 
It  is  no  longer  a  question  of  whether  wages  are  to  be  kept 
at  their  present  standard  or  to  be  reduced ;  it  is  a  question 
what  is  to  be  done  with  the  men  who  want  to  perform  the 
work  which  others  are  performing  in  other  countries  when 
they  find  no  demand  for  their  labor  in  this  country. 

When  he  came  to  the  discussion  of  the  wool  schedule 
he  suggested  another  line  of  thought.  He  declared 
that  the  tactics  of  the  free  trader  from  the  beginning 
had  been,  first,  to  bribe  the  manufacturer  of  woollen 
goods  with  the  idea  of  free  wool  and  protected  manu 
facture  of  woollen  goods,  and  then,  when  that  had  been 
accomplished,  to  excite  the  hostility  of  the  wool  grower 
and  the  farmer  against  the  manufacturer.  The  first 
proposition  of  that  plan  involved  the  idea  that  the 
manufacturer  of  woollen  goods  could  be  bribed. 

He  pointed  out  that  the  pending  bill  seemed  to 
strike  its  deadliest  blow  at  the  farmers  all  around. 
It  was  not  wool  alone  which  was  slaughtered ;  but  there 
was  to  be  free  wheat,  free  corn,  free  rye,  free  oats,  a 
reduction  of  one  half  of  the  duty  on  hay,  the  largest 
crop  in  the  United  States,  and  innumerable  reductions 
below  the  protective  point  upon  the  products  of  the 
farm: 

Why  is  it?  Is  the  farmer  the  ''robber"?  Is  the  farmer 
the  "  robber  baron  "  ?  Is  he  the  "  greedy  monopolist "  ?  Is 
he  the  man  who  is  plundering  the  people?  There  is  but 
one  reason  for  it ;  there  is  but  one  explanation  of  the  policy 


The  Wilson-Gorman  Bill  249 

of  the  bill,  and  that  I  have  already  given.  It  is,  strike  the 
farmer  first,  then  arouse  his  hostility  against  the  protected 
industries  in  the  country. 

I  said  that  the  woollen  manufacturer  of  New  England 
was  not  to  be  purchased  by  that  bribe,  and  was  not  to  be 
caught  by  that  bait.  I  have  too  much  faith  in  the  agri 
culturist  of  the  country  to  believe  that  he  will  fall  into  the 
trap  which  has  been  set  by  the  free  traders.  There  is 
no  reason  why  this  should  be  done.  No  excuse  can  be 
given  for  it.  If  a  revenue  tariff  is  the  doctrine  of  the  Demo 
cratic  party,  there  is  no  article  upon  which  a  revenue  duty 
could  be  more  properly  imposed  than  upon  wool.  If  a 
revenue  duty  with  incidental  protection  be  the  doctrine 
of  the  Democratic  party,  there  is  no  article  upon  which  an 
incidentally  protective  duty  could  be  more  properly  levied 
than  upon  wool.  This  proposition  is  without  excuse, 
wicked  and  monstrous,  throwing  away  the  revenue  which 
is  derived  from  this  article,  and  which  ought  to  be  derived 
from  it,  upon  a  pretended  benefit  to  the  consumer  of 
woollen  goods. 

After  the  Senate  by  a  vote  of  46  to  4  had  defeated 
Senator  Peffer's  motion  to  put  iron  on  the  free  list, — 
only  one  Democrat,  Hill  of  New  York,  voting  in  the 
affirmative, — Mr.  Platt  moved  to  increase  the  rate  from 
40  cents  to  60  cents  a  ton.  He  made  his  amendment 
the  text  for  a  short  sermon  on  the  attitude  of  New 
England : 

I  move  this  amendment  because  I  am  a  protectionist, 
and  because  I  wish  to  vote  for  protective  duties  for  all 
industries.  As  a  New  England  man,  since  there  has  been 
so  much  said  in  this  discussion  about  our  desiring  in  New 
England  to  secure  protective  duties  for  ourselves  with 
alleged  indifference  to  the  other  industries  of  the  country, 
I  do  not  wish  to  let  that  suggestion  pass  without  notice. 
We  mine  no  iron  ore  to  speak  of  in  New  England.  There 


250  Orville  H.  Platt 

is  a  little  mined  in  one  county  in  my  State,  a  little  in 
Berkshire  County,  Massachusetts,  and  a  very  little  in 
Maine,  but  the  production  of  iron  ore  in  New  England  is 
so  small  that  it  cuts  no  figure  in  the  great  production  of 
iron  ore  in  this  country. 

We  have  been  told  that  New  England  is  for  free  coal, 
free  iron  ore,  and  free  wool.  If  I  know  the  sentiment  of 
New  England  and  the  New  England  manufacturers,  the 
New  England  workingman  and  the  New  England  mer 
chants  do  not  desire  or  ask  for  free  raw  materials,  as  they 
are  called  in  this  respect.  We  do  not  want  free  iron  ore; 
we  do  not  want  free  coal,  and  we  do  not  want  free  wool, 
for  the  reason  that  we  are  protectionists,  and  we  desire 
that  there  shall  be  extended  to  every  industry  in  the  United 
States,  whether  it  be  mining,  farming,  or  manufacturing, 
the  same  protection  which  we  believe  to  be  good  for  our 
own  industries  in  New  England. 

We  believe  in  protection  as  a  system;  we  believe  that 
every  industry  in  the  United  States  carried  on  by  American 
labor  needs  such  protection  as  will  enable  it  to  fairly  com 
pete  with  the  industries  carried  on  by  the  laborers  of  other 
countries,  and  we  propose  to  stand  by  it  no  matter  what 
its  immediate  effect  may  be  upon  the  particular  industries 
in  our  section. 

Impotent  though  the  Fifty-third  Congress  was,  it 
contrived  to  send  the  Tariff  bill  to  the  White  House 
through  the  abject  surrender  of  the  majority  in  the 
House  of  Representatives  in  accepting  the  Senate 
schedules  without  amendment.  President  Cleveland 
allowed  the  bill  to  become  a  law  without  his  signature, 
but  the  Wilson-Gorman  act  was  branded  at  its  birth. 
Even  before  its  passage,  it  was  recognized  that  the 
party  which  framed  it  and  forced  it  upon  a  reluctant 
Executive  was  doomed;  that  the  House  of  Representa 
tives  to  be  chosen  in  the  following  November  would 


The  Wilson-Gorman  Bill  251 

have  a  Republican  majority,  and  that  in  all  probability 
the  President  and  Congress  to  be  chosen  two  years 
later  would  be  Republican,  thus  insuring  a  speedy  sub 
stitution  for  the  Wilson-Gorman  act  of  a  consistent 
protective  tariff. 


CHAPTER  XX 

THE  DINGLEY  TARIFF 

A  Member  of  the  Finance  Committee — A  Controlling  Factor  in 

Tariff  Legislation — Attitude  toward  the  Reciprocity  Clauses — 

A  Strong  Advocate  of  Administration  Policies. 

AS  a  sequence  to  the  extraordinary  exhibition  of 
legislative  imbecility  afforded  by  the  Fifty-third 
Congress,  the  House  of  Representatives  in  the  Fifty- 
fourth  Congress,  elected  in  1894,  was  Republican  by  a 
majority  which  nobody  had  ventured  to  predict.  Two 
years  later  William  McKinley,  the  "  Advance  Agent  of 
Prosperity,"  was  nominated  for  President  by  a  great 
majority,  mainly  because  he  stood  in  the  popular  mind 
emphatically  as  the  representative  of  those  issues  which 
were  the  antithesis  of  the  issues  which  for  four  years 
had  spelled  financial  upheaval  and  distress,  free  soup- 
houses,  and  idle  mills.  He  was  elected  by  a  majority 
equally  striking,  because  in  spite  of  Mr.  Bryan  and  the 
free-silver  diversion  the  Republican  party,  under  his 
leadership,  was  known  to  stand  for  protection  and 
prosperity. 

The  first  task  set  for  the  new  administration  was  to 
place  on  the  statute-books  a  tariff  act  which  should 
embody  the  protective  principle,  and  a  special  session 
of  Congress  was  called  for  that  purpose  to  meet  im 
mediately  after  the  inauguration.  In  anticipation 
of  the  special  session,  the  Ways  and  Means  Committee 

252 


The  Dingley  Tariff  253 

of  the  House,  of  which  Mr.  Dingley  of  Maine  was  Chair 
man,  spent  the  entire  winter  of  1896-7  in  framing  a  bill 
to  be  laid  before  Congress  as  speedily  as  possible  after 
its  assembling.  In  due  season  this  bill  went  over  to 
the  other  end  of  the  Capitol  there  to  meet  the  re 
modelling  which  is  the  fate  of  every  revenue  measure. 
Mr.  Platt  had  been  placed  upon  the  Finance  Committee 
at  the  beginning  of  the  Fifty-fourth  Congress  as  soon  as 
the  Republicans  secured  control  of  the  Senate,  and  at 
the  beginning  of  the  Fifty-fifth  Congress  he  was  the 
fourth  member  of  the  Committee  in  seniority,  outranked 
only  by  the  venerable  Chairman,  Morrill  of  Vermont, 
Allison,  and  Aldrich.  Other  Republican  members  were 
Wolcott  of  Colorado,  Burrows  of  Michigan,  Jones  of 
Nevada.  It  was  the  understanding  that  Aldrich, 
Allison,  and  Platt  were  to  pull  the  laboring  oars.  Their 
duty  was  to  understand  the  proposed  bill,  schedule  by 
schedule,  to  defend  it  on  the  floor  of  the  Senate,  and  to 
act  as  managers  for  the  Senate  in  the  conference  be 
tween  the  two  Houses.  Mr.  Platt  went  at  this  wrork 
with  his  accustomed  thoroughness.  Even  while  the 
bill  was  under  consideration  by  the  House,  he  and  his 
associates  on  the  Committee  were  conducting  their  own 
inquiries  and  tentatively  framing  their  own  schedules. 
Russell  of  Connecticut  was  a  member  of  the  Ways  and 
Means  Committee,  as  useful  at  one  end  of  the  Capitol 
as  Platt  was  at  the  other.  The  two  men  were  the 
closest  of  friends  and  they  worked  together  in  effective 
harmony. 

Whenever  a  Connecticut  manufacturer  applied  to 
either  Senator  or  Representative  for  help  he  was  likely 
to  be  cross-questioned  in  a  way  to  convince  him  of  the 
advisability  of  knowing  his  own  business,  as  when  a 
New  Milford  man  received  the  following: 


254  Orville  H.  Platt 

In  talking  with  Mr.  Russell  I  find  that  he  would  be  glad 
to  be  more  fully  informed  as  to  the  nature  and  extent  of 
your  business.  One  who  has  a  proposition  to  make  in 
regard  to  a  duty  upon  any  article  needs  to  be  fully  in 
formed.  Will  you  therefore  kindly  state  the  uses  to  which 
this  material  is  put  when  manufactured,  and  the  propor 
tions  of  its  use — that  is,  what  proportion  of  it  may  be  used 
for  a  porcelain,  for  pottery,  and  for  other  things?  Do  the 
three  words  "quartz,"  "silica,"  and  "flint"  mean  the  same 
thing,  or  are  they  different  materials?  How  are  they  used 
when  ground?  Are  they  mixed  with  clay  and  earths  and 
kaolin?  What  foreign  article  comes  in  competition  with 
them?  It  is  not  easy  for  one  not  familiar  with  the 
business  to  see  how  black  pebbles  come  in  competition 
with  white  quartz.  What  should  a  duty  be  placed 
upon?  What  language  should  be  used  in  order  to  cover 
all  the  materials  or  products  that  come  in  competition  with 
this? 

I  think  you  will  appreciate  how  fully  and  particularly 
one  has  to  know  these  things  in  order  to  frame  language 
which  will  be  suitable  for  the  purpose  intended,  or  to  know 
in  what  class  of  articles  of  the  bill  as  hitherto  read  the  new 
articles  subject  to  duty  should  be  placed;  and  then  how 
much  is  invested  in  the  business  in  this  country  approxi 
mately?  What  is  the  value  of  the  product  here?  How 
much  have  importations  been?  What  is  the  value  of  the 
raw  material  and  of  the  finished  product?  .  Where  is  the 
raw  material  produced — anywhere  except  in  the  western 
part  of  our  State,  and  where  do  the  things  which  come  in 
competition  with  it  come  from — what  countries  ?  These  are 
some  of  the  questions  which  it  is  necessary  for  any  one 
considering  the  matter  to  be  quite  thoroughly  informed 
about.  Have  you  any  suggestions  to  make  as  to  the  par 
ticular  language  which  ought  to  be  employed  in  a  bill  to 
effect  the  object  you  desire?  All  these  and  other  questions 
which  will  readily  suggest  themselves  to  you  I  hope  you 
may  be  able  to  answer. 


The  Dingley  Tariff  255 

He  was  continually  in  correspondence  with  many 
men  from  many  States,  was  occupied  practically  every 
waking  hour  for  many  weeks  in  committee  or  in  con 
ference,  was  in  his  seat  in  the  Senate  constantly  while 
the  Tariff  bill  was  under  consideration,  was  as  potential 
as  any  other  man  in  shaping  the  Dingley  bill,  and  yet 
in  the  whole  course  of  the  debate  he  did  not  make  a 
single  speech  of  even  moderate  length.  He  answered 
questions,  gave  information  in  regard  to  the  most 
complicated  of  the  schedules,  was  watchful,  helpful, 
industrious,  invaluable,  but  although  he  was  on  his 
feet  scores  of  times,  he  did  not  indulge  in  a  flight  of 
oratory  for  home  consumption.  The  nearest  approach 
to  it  was  when  a  Democratic  Senator  asked  him  if  the 
foreigner  paid  the  tax,  and  tempted  him  to  reply : 

I  must  ask  to  be  excused  from  entering  into  a  discussion 
of  the  principles  upon  which  the  protective  system  is  based. 
Unfortunately  the  Senators  who  would  like  to  explain  it 
fully  and  at  great  length,  and  answer  the  very  remarkable 
and  wonderful  statements  which  have  been  made  on  the 
other  side  for  the  last  three  or  four  weeks,  are  compelled 
to  sit  still  in  order  to  secure  the  passage  of  the  pending 
bill  within  any  time  that  will  satisfy  the  country. 

Business  interests  everywhere  were  pressing  Congress 
to  get  the  new  law  into  operation,  not  only  because  the 
discussion  of  any  tariff  bill  leaves  commerce  in  a  state 
of  uncertainty,  but  because  the  country  was  for  having 
the  Wilson-Gorman  act  wiped  off  the  statute-books 
with  the  least  possible  delay.  Mr.  Platt  sympathized 
with  this  feeling,  and  yet  he  appreciated  the  importance 
of  making  haste  slowly  with  legislation  which  was  so 
vitally  to  affect  the  welfare  of  the  country.  He  was 
ready  to  devote  many  weeks  to  the  consideration  of 


256  Orville  H.  Platt 

the  bill.     This  feeling  he  expressed  in  writing  to  Charles 
Hopkins  Clark,  while  the  bill  was  still  in  the  House : 

I  saw  a  long  editorial  in  the  Hartford  Courant  with 
reference  to  the  duty  on  books.  I  think  that  was  one  of 
the  items  which  probably  received  very  little  consideration, 
owing  to  the  haste  which  was  supposed  to  be  necessary 
by  the  Committee  in  completing  its  consideration  of  the 
Tariff  bill  so  as  to  get  it  before  the  new  Congress  at  its 
opening,  and  that  a  mistake  was  made  in  that  as  in  many 
other  matters,  by  reason  of  the  supposed  necessity  of 
immediate  action.  I  think  there  is  no  doubt  that  it  will 
be  corrected,  by  the  House  probably,  if  not,  then  by  the 
Senate.  I  presume  that  the  same  pressure  for  the  passage 
of  the  bill  quickly  will  be  brought  to  bear  upon  the  Senate, 
and  I  simply  want  to  excuse,  in  advance,  any  seeming 
delay  which  may  occur  there  by  saying  that  the  demand  for 
the  passage  of  "a"  bill  is  all  well  enough,  but  we  cannot 
afford  to  pass  an  ill-considered  bill.  If  we  did,  the  country 
in  six  months'  time  would  be  blaming  us  a  good  deal 
more  than  it  will  if  we  take  time  for  careful  investigation. 
In  the  House  nothing  is  considered,  but  is  put  through 
arbitrarily.  In  the  Senate,  some  one  must  be  ready  to 
give  a  reason  for  every  rate  of  duty,  for  every  classification, 
and  to  explain  the  scope  and  effect  of  every  use  of  language. 

To  that  task  he  devoted  himself.  The  Dingley  bill 
remained  in  the  Senate  from  April  ist,  to  July  yth,  a 
period  of  over  three  months,  and  he  was  on  duty  with 
Mr.  Aldrich  and  Mr.  Allison  all  that  time,  laboring  often 
far  into  the  night.  The  end  crowned  the  work;  for  a 
measure  was  finally  enacted  under  which  the  industries 
of  the  country  were  to  thrive  to  a  degree  beyond  the 
dreams  of  those  who  framed  it,  and  which  is  now 
acknowledged,  after  twelve  years  of  practical  test,  to 
have  been  the  most  scientific  tariff  bill  ever  constructed. 

He  not  only  supported  the  reciprocity  clauses  of  the 


The  Dingley  Tariff  257 

Dingley  law,  but,  after  the  law  had  gone  into  effect  and 
Mr.  Kasson  by  direction  of  President  McKinley  and 
Secretary  Hay  had  negotiated  treaties  accordingly  with 
various  countries,  he  sustained  the  administration  in 
its  attempt  to  secure  ratification  of  the  treaties  in  the 
Senate.  It  was  not  an  easy  thing  for  him  to  do,  and  he 
seems  to  have  given  the  matter  considerable  thought 
before  making  up  his  mind.  In  writing  in  December, 
1899,  about  the  French  treaty  he  said: 

I  am  inclined  to  think  that  the  sentiment  of  the  Senate 
with  regard  to  reciprocity  treaties  is  still  in  an  unsettled 
condition.  Of  course  every  Senator  is  being  urged,  by 
some  one  who  thinks  that  his  business  is  going  to  be  more 
or  less  injured,  to  oppose  the  treaty  on  that  ground,  but 
I  do  not  think  that  it  is  going  to  be  looked  at  from  such  a 
narrow  standpoint  as  that.  The  broader  view  is  the  one 
which  ought  to  be  taken,  and  that  is  whether  the  reci 
procity  treaties,  on  the  whole,  will  be  beneficial  to  the 
United  States  or  otherwise,  and  I  think  that  there  has 
been  more  prospective  opposition  to  the  French  treaty 
created  by  the  publications  which  have  come  from  Paris 
than  in  any  other  way.  The  French  Government,  to  over 
come  the  opposition  to  the  treaty  there,  seems  to  have 
allowed  a  statement  to  go  out  that  the  French  negotiators 
won  a  great  advantage  for  France  over  the  United  States 
by  the  treaty,  and  people  who  do  not  understand  the  matter 
very  well,  whether  they  are  Senators  or  business  men,  are 
likely  to  say  that  if  that  is  so  we  do  not  want  the  treaty. 
I  do  not  know  how  many  things  Kasson  gave  away  at  the 
last  in  order  to  get  the  treaty  signed,  but  I  know  he  gave 
a  good  many,  and  some  of  them  hurt.  Still  a  man  who  is 
himself  a  fractional  element,  even  though  it  be  a  small 
fractional  element,  of  the  treaty-making  power,  ought 
to  look  at  such  agreements  without  prejudice  and  not  be 
governed  by  minor  considerations. 


258  Orville  H.  Platt 

I  really  do  not  feel  quite  settled  myself  about  this  matter. 
It  all  turns,  in  my  mind,  upon  the  question  of  whether  we 
have  obtained  fair  equivalents  for  the  concessions  we  are 
making.  From  the  standpoint  of  a  man  who  is  making  a 
bargain,  we  might,  however,  afford  to  give  away  something 
if  we  were  sure  of  bringing  about  pleasant,  mutual,  and 
satisfactory  relations  between  ourselves  and  France.  In 
other  words,  good-will  would  be  worth  paying  something 
for,  if  you  could  rely  upon  a  Frenchman's  good-will,  but, 
as  I  say,  I  have  not  yet  any  decided  convictions  or  opinions 
in  regard  to  this  French  treaty.  I  have  been  waiting 
rather  to  understand  it  more  fully  than  I  do.  It  went  to 
the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations,  and  I  suppose,  al 
though  I  do  not  know  that  I  am  right,  that  when  they 
have  heard  Mr.  Kasson's  explanation  of  the  treaty  they  are 
likely  in  some  way  to  ask  information  and  advice  of  the 
Finance  Committee,  and  I  suppose  that  when  that  time 
comes  I  could  get  a  little  more  intelligent  idea  of  the 
situation  here.  I  have  been  holding  my  mind  in  a  recep 
tive  state.  I  do  not  think  that  there  has  been  much  talk 
about  it  among  Senators.  I  do  not  think  that  any  political 
feeling  has  developed,  and  I  imagine  that  a  good  many  of 
the  Senators  are  in  my  state  of  mind  about  it — that  is,  that 
they  want  to  ratify  it  unless  we  have  so  decidedly  the  worst 
of  it  in  the  treaty  that  we  ought  not  to  do  it.  I  do  not  think 
that  the  doctrine  of  protection  is  very  much  involved  in  it, 
though  I  am  and  have  been  a  protectionist,  because  I 
believed  in  the  doctrine.  But  protection  and  reciprocity 
have  not  been  thought  to  be  incompatible,  and  I  am  quite 
sure  that  there  are  a  good  many  articles  on  which  we  have 
allowed  reductions  that  were  somewhat  over-protected 
in  the  Dingley  bill. 

The  duty  on  fruits  was  forced  upon  us,  but  later,  like 
a  good  many  other  articles,  parties  engaged  in  producing 
them  could  stand  a  reasonable  reduction  of  the  duty  with 
out  practical  loss.  In  some  instances,  either  from  intention 
or  because  our  commissioner  had  to  agree  in  order  to  get 


The  Dingley  Tariff  259 

any  treaty  at  all,  there  have  been  reductions  which  will 
be  somewhat  harmful. 

I  do  not  know  where  I  may  finally  bring  up  on  it.  My 
opinion  is  that  I  shall  be  for  the  treaty,  although  Con 
necticut  people  suppose  that  they  are  hit  all  along  the  line. 


CHAPTER  XXI 

FREE  CUBA 

Opposed  to  Recognition  of  Belligerency — Tries  to  Prevent  War — 
Pleads  for  Moderation — A  Pillar  of  Conservatism — A  Strong 
Aid  to  the  Administration — Growth  of  the  War  Sentiment — 
Destruction  of  the  Maine — The  President's  Message — Adop 
tion  of  Resolutions  for  Intervention — In  a  Small  Minority — 
Hostilities  Precipitated. 

IN  the  spring  of  1895  a  situation  developed  in  Cuba 
which  was  to  exert  a  far-reaching  influence  upon 
the  future  of  the  United  States,  and  which  called  into 
play,  before  its  course  was  run,  the  highest  powers  of 
American  public  men.  The  insurrection  which  was 
precipitated  by  the  landing  of  Jose  Marti  in  February, 
1895,  rapidly  assumed  proportions  setting  it  apart  from 
the  many  uprisings  with  which  the  "ever  faithful  Isle" 
had  been  infested  at  intervals  for  seventy  years.  In 
six  months  the  insurgents  had  taken  possession  of 
Santiago  and  of  all  the  rural  districts  as  far  west  as 
Havana — more  than  had  been  accomplished  in  the 
entire  course  of  the  "ten  years'  war"  which  had  ended 
twenty  years  before.  Sympathy  in  the  United  States, 
aroused  by  constantly  increasing  newspaper  exploita 
tion  of  the  gallant  struggle  for  liberty  going  on  so  near 
our  shores,  became  acute  as  the  session  of  Congress  of 
1895-6  approached.  There  was  an  insistent  demand 
that  the  sentiment  of  the  American  people  should  find 
voice  at  Washington.  President  Cleveland  and  Secre- 

260 


Free  Cuba  261 

tary  Olney  were  opposed  to  any  action ;  and  the  atten 
tion  of  the  Cuban  sympathizers  was  turned  to  Congress. 
Many  resolutions  were  introduced — some  declaring  for 
the  immediate  recognition  of  independence,  some  em 
bodying  a  recognition  of  belligerency,  others  declaring 
for  intervention,  still  others  for  neutrality.  Senator 
Platt  felt  that  Congress  for  the  time  at  least  should  keep 
hands  off.  He  regarded  the  recognition  of  belligerency 
as  a  matter  primarily  for  the  Executive  branch  of  the 
Government.  The  position  which  he  assumed  was  far 
from  popular.  The  trend  of  sentiment  everywhere  was 
unmistakably  toward  the  recognition  of  the  insurgents. 
Yellow  journals  were  inflaming  the  public  mind  and 
Connecticut  was  no  less  Cuban-mad  than  other  States. 
Mr.  Platt 's  re-election  to  the  Senate  was  pending. 
Ambitious  rivals  were  watching  their  opportunity. 
But  he  did  not  care  what  effect  his  attitude  might  have 
on  his  personal  fortunes.  He  did  not  shrink  from  the 
issue.  On  January  16,  1896,  he  said  in  the  Senate: 

Recognition  of  the  insurgents  as  belligerents  is  not  a 
matter  which  is  due  to  them ;  but  it  is  a  question  which 
pertains  solely  to  the  interests  of  the  United  States.  If 
a  proclamation  of  neutrality  were  issued  .  .  .  it  would  be 
considered,  and  justly  considered  under  international  law, 
as  an  unfriendly  act  to  the  parent  Government.  .  .  .  We 
in  this  country  sympathize  naturally  with  every  people 
that  is  seeking  to  establish  a  republican  form  of  government ; 
but  I  think  that  we  ought  not  to  rush  hastily  into  a  matter 
of  according  belligerent  rights  to  such  a  people.  We  ought 
to  observe  the  rules  which  have  been  laid  down  by  inter 
national  comity  with  reference  to  such  matters.  I  should 
be  very  sorry  to  see  any  resolution  passed  here  which  in 
any  way  would  indicate  that  the  President  of  the  United 
States  and  the  State  Department  were  not  doing  all  that 


262  Orville  H.  Platt 

that  branch  of  the  Government  ought  to  do  with  reference 
to  the  conflict  now  pending  in  a  neighboring  foreign  country. 

He  felt  that  Congress  could  not  with  propriety  go 
beyond  a  declaration  of  sympathy  unless  it  intended 
frankly  to  declare  war.  Resolutions  were  adopted 
by  House  and  by  Senate,  one  declaring  that  the  United 
States  ought  to  be  neutral,  the  other  that  the  United 
States  ought  to  intervene.  The  Senate  managers  of  the 
Conference  Committee  recommended  that  the  Senate 
abandon  its  own  resolutions  and  adopt  those  passed  by 
the  House.  Senator  Platt  urged  that  the  report  of  the 
Conference  Committee  be  disagreed  to,  and  on  March 
23, 1 896,  as  expressing  the  real  sentiment  of  the  Senate, 
he  submitted  the  following: 

Resolved,  That  the  Senate  (the  House  of  Representatives 
concurring)  hereby  expresses  its  earnest  desire  and  hope 
that  Cuba  may  soon  become  a  free,  independent,  and  repub 
lican  government,  and  that  the  friendly  offices  of  the  United 
States  should  be  offered  by  the  President  to  the  Spanish 
Government  to  secure  such  result. 

That  he  thought  deeply  on  this  subject  is  shown  by 
his  correspondence.  Writing  on  March  7,  1896,  to 
Gen.  E.  S.  Greeley  of  New  Haven,  he  said: 

I  have  a  very  decided  feeling  that  we  are  letting  our 
sympathy  run  away  with  our  judgment,  and  yet  it  is 
undeniable,  I  think,  that  Spain  has  treated  its  colony  of 
Cuba  with  more  harshness  than  has  ever  been  shown  by  a 
parent  country  to  such  a  colony;  has  taxed  them  heavily 
without  representation,  and  has  been  severe  and  almost 
brutal  in  its  treatment.  Then  General  Weyler's  published 
orders  seem  to  indicate  a  barbarous  and  cruel  spirit  in  the 
matter  of  conducting  the  war  against  rebels,  or  patriots, 
whichever  they  may  be.  Under  such  circumstances  it  is 


Free  Cuba  263 

almost  impossible  not  to  sympathize  with  the  people  of 
Cuba  if  they  are  in  good  faith  and  earnestly  striving  to 
throw  off  Spanish  authority  and  establish  free  government. 
To  what  extent  this  condition  of  things  exists  it  is  almost 
impossible  to  ascertain.  Reports  are  very  conflicting  and, 
as  I  believe,  so  exaggerated  on  both  sides  that  we  don't 
know  the  truth  of  the  situation.  I  have  not  believed  that 
there  was  a  case  outside  of  the  ground  of  sympathy  for  the 
recognition  of  the  insurgents  as  belligerents,  and  yet  I  am 
inclined  to  think  that  I  would  vote  a  resolution  of  sympathy. 

A  few  days  later,  on  March  i2th,  he  wrote  to  A.  D. 
Osborne  of  New  Haven: 

I  do  not  propose  to  vote  for  the  Cuban  resolutions  in  their 
present  form,  and  if  I  get  the  opportunity  shall  state  my 
reasons  therefor. 

On  March  i4th,  he  wrote  to  Rev.  E.  P.  Parker  of 
Hartford: 

It  has  been  understood  here,  at  least  since  January, 
that  I  did  not  believe  in  the  foolishness  which  prevails 
with  regard  to  Cuba.  I  send  you  from  the  Record  of  the 
sixteenth  of  January  a  few  words  that  I  said;  I  don't  sup 
pose  they  had  much  influence,  but  they  indicate  what  I 
thought  of  the  subject  at  that  time.  A  strange  thing  in  all 
this  discussion  is  that  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations 
does  not  seem  to  have  examined  the  law  or  the  facts  with 
regard  to  Cuba,  at  least  they  have  not  referred  to  the  law 
and  have  been  quite  chary  as  to  the  facts.  Probably  we 
cannot  stop  the  passage  of  these  resolutions,  but  we  will 
get  enough  votes  against  them  as  they  now  stand  to  show 
quite  a  conservative  element,  and  I  intend,  some  time  before 
the  debate  closes,  to  make  my  position  known. 

On  March  i6th,  he  wrote  to  H.  Wales  Lines: 

If  I  get  a  chance  at  Cuba,  I  am  going  to  say  that  it  is 
quite  proper  for  Congress  to  express  its  desire  that  Cuba 


264  Orville  H.  Platt 

should  become  a  government,  republican  in  form  and  spirit, 
but  at  that  Congress  ought  to  stop ;  that  we  ought  not  to 
recognize  belligerency,  because  there  is  no  warrant  for  it 
in  the  conditions  existing  in  Cuba  considered  with  reference 
to  the  rules  of  international  law  for  a  hundred  years,  and 
our  own  position  frequently  and  vigorously  stated;  and 
that  above  all  it  is  entirely  wrong  to  talk  about  intervention 
on  account  of  the  proximity  of  Cuba  or  the  loss  which  people 
of  the  United  States  may  be  sustaining  in  the  way  of  trade. 
If  what  I  say  shall  be  unpopular,  I  cannot  help  it.  I  shall 
at  least  try  to  make  my  position  clear  and  then  must  take 
the  verdict  of  the  people  upon  it. 

To  Franklin  Farrell  of  Ansonia,  he  wrote  on  March 
3oth: 

I  should  be  very  glad  to  see  free  government  established 
in  Cuba,  but  I  don't  think  that  the  United  States  ought  to 
go  to  war  with  Spain  to  secure  that  end,  or  depart  from  its 
established  policy  in  dealing  with  foreign  nations. 

The  resolutions  finally  adopted  after  much  debate  and 
conference  declared  that  a  state  of  war  existed  in  Cuba, 
that  the  United  States  would  observe  strict  neutrality, 
and  that  the  President  should  offer  the  good  offices 
of  the  United  States  with  the  Spanish  Government  to 
secure  the  recognition  of  the  independence  of  the 
island. 

As  might  have  been  expected,  this  declaration  had  no 
effect.  The  insurrection  continued,  likewise  the  agita 
tion  in  the  United  States.  It  was  the  year  of  the 
Presidential  election.  Both  great  political  parties  at 
their  national  conventions  passed  resolutions  of  sym 
pathy  with  Cuba. 

A  Republican  President  and  House  of  Representa 
tives  were  elected  by  great  majorities,  and  in  the  winter 
preceding  the  inauguration  of  President  McKinley  the 


Free  Cuba  265 

Cuban  question  became  still  more  acute.  The  Com 
mittee  on  Foreign  Relations,  through  Senator  Cameron 
of  Pennsylvania,  on  December  21,  1896,  reported  a 
brief  resolution  recognizing  the  republic  of  Cuba. 
It  was  accompanied  by  a  voluminous  report.  The 
business  community  was  agitated.  Stocks  went  tum 
bling.  Secretary  Olney  came  out  in  an  interview  in 
which  he  declared  that  President  Cleveland  would  pay 
no  attention  to  the  joint  resolution,  even  if  it  passed 
Congress  over  the  veto ;  because  the  right  of  recognition 
pertained  solely  to  the  Executive,  and  the  resolution 
would  be  only  the  expression  of  opinion  of  "  certain 
eminent  gentlemen."  In  the  closing  hours  of  the 
administration  it  was  not  thought  well  to  force  such  an 
issue  and  so  the  resolution  slumbered  on  the  calendar. 

Senator  Platt  was  greatly  exercised  by  this  agitation 
in  Congress  and  among  the  people.  It  seemed  to  him 
that  the  United  States  was  being  thoughtlessly  forced 
into  a  position  where  war  with  Spain  would  be  in 
evitable.  On  December  18,  1895,  we  find  him  writing 
to  Isaac  H.  Bromley  of  the  New  York  Tribune  as 
follows : 

Your  articles  in  the  Tribune  about  Cuba  are  in  accord 
with  my  judgment.  But  if  the  sober,  thoughtful  business 
interests  of  the  country  don't  want  a  resolution  passed 
through  Congress  recognizing  "the  independence  of  the 
republic  of  Cuba"  they  must  speak  out  and  speak  quickly 
and  loudly.  This  false  devotion  to  the  cause  of  liberty,  the 
uneasiness  which  prevails,  and  the  desire  for  patriotic  no 
toriety  is  acting  and  reacting  on  members  of  the  Senate  and 
House  who  are  usually  level-headed,  and  things  are  being 
worked  up  to  a  frenzy  that  is  sweeping  such  men  off  their 
feet.  It  seems  to  be  pretty  much  understood  that  our  Sen 
ate  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations  is  going  to  report  such 


266  Orville  H.  Platt 

a  resolution,  and  if  it  does,  the  great  probability  now  is  that 
it  would  pass  the  Senate.  It  is  hard  to  stem  the  water 
when  the  dam  breaks  away.  There  is  no  republic  of  Cuba, 
and  the  people  there  who  claim  there  is  have  not  established 
their  independence  any  more  than  the  Armenians  have 
theirs  in  Turkey.  The  newspaper  rot  about  what  is  going 
on  there,  though  published  one  day  and  contradicted  the 
next,  seems  to  stir  up  all  the  aggressive  spirit  in  the  minds 
of  the  people,  and  the  Cuban  junta  or  legation,  or  whatever 
it  is  called,  is  active  and  pestiferous  in  circulating  its  views 
of  the  situation.  It  is  a  case  of  Naboth's  vineyard.  Men 
whose  love  of  humanity  was  not  fluttered  when  in  Texas 
about  a  year  ago  a  negro  was  covered  with  kerosene  oil 
and  burned  to  death  on  a  public  platform  in  the  presence  of 
7000  yelling  people,  are  shedding  tears  over  the  sad  fate 
of  Maceo.  So  I  repeat  what  I  said  in  the  first  place,  that 
if  those  who  do  not  want  a  war  with  Spain  (because  if  we 
recognize  an  independence  which  does  not  exist,  we  ought 
to  go  and  establish  it  and  should  probably  be  forced  into  a 
war  anyway)  had  better  bestir  themselves.  It  is  another 
case  like  the  sound-money  sentiment  of  the  country  sitting 
still  and  allowing  silver  to  be  howled  in  every  schoolhouse 
of  the  United  States  without  making  a  reply. 

On  the  following  day  he  wrote  to  Charles  Hopkins 
Clark,  editor  of  the  Hartford  Courant  : 

The  Foreign  Relations  Committee  is  going  to  report  on 
Monday  a  resolution  recognizing  "the  independence  of  the 
republic  of  Cuba, "  and  unless  people  are  ready  to  sit  still 
and  see  that  done  without  protest,  they  ought  to  give 
expression  to  their  opinions  at  once. 

To  Hon.  John  Birge  he  wrote : 

To  pass  such  a  resolution  would  be  mockery  and  ludicrous 
if  we  did  not  intend  by  armed  force  to  help  the  insurgents 
to  achieve  the  independence  which  we  recognize,  though 
in  fact  it  does  not  exist.  If  we  pass  such  a  resolution  we 


Free  Cuba  267 

ought  to  send  the  army  and  navy  there  to  make  independ 
ence  and  a  republican  government  an  accomplished  fact. 
And  I  cannot  look  upon  a  question  so  grave  and  serious  as 
this  from  the  mere  standpoint  of  sentiment. 

The  legal  and  constitutional  question  involved — as 
to  whether  the  right  of  recognition  of  belligerency  did 
not  rest  exclusively  with  the  Executive — was  one  which 
disturbed  even  some  of  those  who  were  favorable  to  the 
adoption  of  unequivocal  resolutions,  although,  as  in  all 
such  cases  where  Congress  has  set  its  mind  on  the 
accomplishment  of  a  certain  end,  the  doubtful  consti 
tutionality  of  the  action  would  not  have  been  permitted 
to  block  the  path  of  its  legislative  purpose.  Mr.  Platt 
was  one  of  those  who  believed  the  President  alone  was 
empowered  to  recognize  belligerency,  but  there  were 
lawyers,  equally  distinguished,  who  held  to  the  contrary 
opinion. 

On  December  2ist,  the  day  the  resolution  was  re 
ported,  he  indicated  his  perplexity  in  a  letter  to  former 
Senator  George  F.  Edmunds: 

My  own  view  is  that,  under  the  Constitution,  the  matter 
of  dealing  with  foreign  powers  and  recognizing  their 
sovereignty  or  the  recognition  of  belligerent  rights  is 
committed  to  the  Executive  branch,  that  Congress  has 
never  yet  attempted  to  pass  any  resolutions  which  did  not 
recognize  either  in  terms,  or  tacitly,  this  doctrine,  and  that 
all  our  diplomatic  history  confirms  the  understanding  of 
lawyers  and  statesmen  that  the  power  rests  alone  with  the 
President. 

Of  course,  I  have  not  investigated  it  as  closely  on  authori 
ties  and  precedents  as  a  Senator  should  in  order  to  talk 
about  it,  but  the  claim  that  the  President  cannot  effectively 
recognize  a  foreign  power  without  the  aid  of  Congress  is 
rather  embarrassing.  He  cannot  send  a  minister  without 


268  Orville  H.  Platt 

an  appropriation  for  his  salary  by  Congress,  so  that,  as  in 
most  of  the  cases  where  power  is  committed  to  one  branch, 
the  concurrence  of  the  other  is  necessary  to  make  it  effective. 
It  is  plain  to  my  mind  that  Congress  should  not  attempt  to 
pass  a  resolution  which  assumes  to  recognize  the  independ 
ence  of  a  revolutionary  people,  but  I  am  a  little  troubled 
about  the  effect  of  such  action  by  joint  resolution  passed 
over  the  Presidential  veto.  It  would  be  an  embarrassing 
situation  to  say  the  least,  and  yet  I  cannot  think  that  it 
would  operate  as  such  a  recognition  of  the  new  Government 
as  that  the  courts  in  the  cases  which  might  arise  would  hold 
it  to  be  an  accomplished  fact. 

With  the  incoming  of  the  new  administration  there 
was  a  lull  for  a  while  and  then  fiie  broke  out  afresh  with 
increasing  fury.  Weyler's  system  of  reconcentration 
was  achieving  its  cruel  ends.  Outrages  on  American 
citizens — most  of  them  naturalized  Cubans — called  for 
redress.  President  McKinley,  more  alert  than  his 
predecessor,  demanded  release  and  redress  in  the  case 
of  every  American  prisoner,  and  by  the  end  of  April 
all  were  released.  On  May  20,  1897,  the  Senate  with 
out  division  passed  a  joint  resolution  recognizing  Cuban 
belligerency.  It  went  to  sleep  in  the  House  under 
Speaker  Reed's  careful  nursing.  But  just  then  Presi 
dent  McKinley,  informed  by  consular  reports  that,  under 
the  reconcentration  system,  American  citizens  as  well 
as  natives  were  being  starved  to  death,  sent  a  special 
message  to  Congress  asking  for  $50,000  with  which  to 
send  supplies  to  those  Americans  who  were  suffering  at 
the  hands  of  Spain.  Congress  acted  immediately.  The 
act  was  approved  May  24,  1897;  and,  with  the  consent 
of  Spain,  American  interference  was  at  last  a  fact, 
through  the  feeding  of  starving  Americans  and  others 
in  the  devastated  island.  The  next  six  months  was  a 


Free  Cuba  269 

period  of  negotiations,  of  demands  and  propositions  on 
the  part  of  the  United  States — of  broken  promises 
and  procrastinating  assurances  on  the  part  of  Spain. 
At  last  the  administration  determined  to  send  a  battle 
ship  to  Havana  for  the  protection  of  Americans  there. 
The  Maine  arrived  in  Havana  on  January  24,  1898. 
On  February  9,  1898,  there  appeared  the  letter  of 
the  Spanish  Minister  in  Washington,  Senor  Dupuy  de 
Lome,  written  on  December  25,  1897,  containing  coarse 
and  insulting  references  to  President  McKinley.  Seven 
days  later,  on  February  i6th,  while  public  feeling  was 
still  high,  came  the  destruction  of  the  Maine  in  Havana 
harbor.  The  smouldering  embers  of  war  broke  into 
flame. 

Senator  Platt,  watching  with  apprehension  the 
growth  of  national  passion,  maintained  his  poise.  He 
was  in  thorough  sympathy  with  President  McKinley 
in  the  endeavor  to  compose  all  differences  without 
resort  to  arms,  or,  if  that  failed,  then  to  postpone  the 
conflict .  He  was  not  for  ' '  peace  at  any  price . "  He  was 
not  governed  by  the  protests  of  "business"  and  Wall 
Street  against  agitation  which  might  unsettle  values. 
He  deplored  war  for  its  own  sake,  and  looked  with  dread 
upon  the  prospect  that  the  United  States  would  plunge 
into  it  and  bring  all  its  horror  upon  the  American 
people.  Through  these  trying  times  he  was  an  avenue 
of  communication  between  the  Capitol  and  the  White 
House.  His  counsel  was  sought  constantly  by  Presi 
dent  McKinley;  and  his  pleas  for  moderation  were 
listened  to  respectfully  even  by  the  most  ardent  of 
those  who  cried  for  war.  There  was  a  long,  tense 
period  of  waiting  while  the  Sampson  board  of  inquiry 
was  completing  its  work,  and  preparing  its  report  on 
the  cause  of  the  destruction  of  the  Maine.  After 


270  Orville  H.  Platt 

that  report  was  sent  to  Congress  on  March  28th,  it  was 
plain  to  almost  everybody  that  the  resources  of  diplo 
macy  had  failed;  but  up  to  that  time  Senator  Platt  and 
those  who  acted  with  him  continued  to  use  their  powers 
of  persuasion  in  what  they  felt  to  be  an  almost  hope 
less  cause.  On  March  23d,  writing  to  Rev.  William 
B.  Carey  of  North  Stonington,  Connecticut,  he  said: 

I  can  understand,  I  think,  how  intensely  people  get 
wrought  up  by  the  anticipation  of  war.  For  myself  I 
believe  that  any  relations  existing  between  Spain  and  the 
United  States  are  quite  susceptible  of  amicable  adjustment 
and  if,  as  I  believe,  peace  can  be  brought  about  in  Cuba  by 
peaceful  methods  by  the  United  States,  it  would  be  a  great 
crime  to  attempt  to  drive  us  to  bring  it  about  by  fighting. 
It  is  very  well  to  talk  about  destroying  the  Spanish  navy. 
God  alone  knows  whether  it  would  be  destroyed,  whether 
it  would  not  destroy  us  in  case  of  war.  Regiments  of  black 
soldiers  would  undoubtedly  be  good  soldiers  in  Cuba  when 
they  were  recruited,  and  organized,  and  disciplined,  but, 
before  that  could  occur,  any  emergency  for  their  use  would 
doubtless  have  passed.  No  one  knows  that  we  would  ever 
get  to  Cuba  if  we  undertook  to  send  soldiers  there,  or,  if  we 
did  get  there,  having  destroyed  the  Spanish  navy,  that  the 
necessity  for  any  great  number  of  soldiers  would  be  ob 
viated.  I  do  not  see  how  people  contemplate  war  without 
horror  or  talk  about  it  without  shuddering,  and  unless  it 
should  appear  that  the  Maine  was  destroyed  by  Spanish 
agency,  I  should  not  be  able  to  formulate  the  rules  which 
would  justify  the  passage  of  a  resolution  declaring  war. 
The  consequences  of  war  cannot  be  computed  in  dollars 
and  cents;  only  in  lives,  and,  if  we  succeed,  what  shall  we 
get  by  it  all?  It  is  quite  the  time  now  for  people  to  have 
cool  heads.  Hot  talk  should  give  way  to  calm  judgment 
and  dispassionate  utterances.  I  only  say  this  because  I  feel 
that  some  one  must  be  level-headed  now  or  our  nation 


Free  Cuba  271 

will  be  put  in  a  wrong  light  in  the  eyes  of  the  world  and  in 
the  final  judgment  of  our  own  conscience. 

On  March  25th,  writing  to  H.  Wales  Lines,  he  said: 

The  situation  here  may  be  described  as  serious  and 
critical.  There  is  a  fear  that  the  radicals  in  Congress  might 
be  able  to  override  the  President  and  pass  resolutions 
which  would  lead  to  immediate  hostilities,  but  I  think  that 
danger  is  now  past.  Certainly  I  think  the  Senate  will 
keep  still  until  the  President  shall  say  to  Congress  that  he 
has  exhausted  all  means  in  his  power  to  provide  for  closing 
the  contest  in  Cuba.  If  he  fails  to  bring  about  some  action 
on  the  part  of  Spain  which  will  look  to  the  early  settlement 
of  the  difficulties  in  Cuba,  and  communicates  to  Congress 
the  fact  that  he  has  failed,  I  think  there  will  be  no  possibility 
of  preventing  then  the  passage  of  a  resolution  for  forcible 
intervention.  Those  who  have  been  clamoring  for  liberty 
and  freedom  and  war,  have  worked  up  a  spirit  in  the  country 
that  something  must  be  done  and  done  quickly  to  stop 
the  condition  of  things  in  Cuba,  and  I  think  Congress  be 
lieves  that  sentiment  to  be  stronger  and  more  general  than 
it  really  is.  I  think  the  President  himself  believes  that 
the  people  of  the  United  States  will  not  tolerate  much 
longer  the  war  in  Cuba  and  that,  if  he  cannot  end  it  by 
negotiations,  the  people  will  insist  that  he  shall  do  so  by 
force.  In  the  meantime,  he  will  do  all  in  his  power  for 
peaceful  adjustment;  but  the  difficulty  is  with  Spain. 
Spain  does  not  want  war,  but  will  not  and  apparently  can 
not  agree  to  independence,  and  it  seems  to  have  come  down 
to  about  this.  Will  the  people  sustain  the  President  in  ac 
cepting  from  Spain  any  proposed  settlement  which  does  not 
include  absolute  independence  for  Cuba?  Spain  might  be 
induced  to  make  more  truly  liberal  propositions  for  auton 
omy  as  it  is  called,  or  in  the  direction  of  self-government  for 
Cuba  than  she  has  yet  made.  The  question  is,  if  she  did, 
and  the  President  believed  that  the  proposition  ought  to 
be  accepted  by  the  insurgents,  will  the  country  sustain  him 


2 72  Orville  H.  Platt 

in  saying  so  if  they  feel  sure  of  Cuban  independence  ?  This 
sets  forth  the  gravity  of  the  situation.  There  has  not  been 
openly  manifested  yet  a  sentiment  which  indicates  that 
the  people  do  not  want  the  United  States  to  fight  Spain 
to  liberate  Cuba  if  its  independence  cannot  be  brought 
about  by  peaceable  methods.  The  report  of  the  naval 
board  of  inquiry  is  likely  to  excite  them  still  more,  but  I 
think  the  conservative  people  of  the  United  States  and 
Congress  will  be  able  to  prevent  action  over  the  President's 
head.  If  the  President  cannot  get  a  settlement  with 
Spain  and  the  insurgents,  which  is  equivalent  to  independ 
ence,  I  fear  nothing  can  restrain  Congress  from  declaring  for 
intervention,  which  is  the  same  thing  as  declaring  war. 

On  the  same  date  in  a  letter  to  Governor  Cooke,  he 
said: 

A  few  of  us  have  determined  that  there  ought  to  be 
no  war  if  it  can  be  avoided  and  yet  we  know  that  the 
situation  is  serious  and  critical  and  a  little  thing  may  plunge 
us  into  a  conflict.  It  is  very  difficult  to  resist  what  is 
supposed  to  be  the  war  spirit  of  the  country.  Represen 
tations  are  made  here  all  the  time  that  the  country  is 
ready  for  war,  and  members  of  Congress  urge  the  President 
to  bring  matters  to  an  immediate  issue;  that  unless  Spain 
immediately  surrenders  control  of  Cuba  and  gives  independ 
ence  to  the  insurgents,  he  should  recommend  Congress  to 
pass  resolutions  directing  intervention,  which,  of  course,  is 
equivalent  to  declaring  war.  What  we  who  are  classed  as 
conservatives  are  trying  to  do  is  to  prevent  Congress  over 
riding  the  President  and  gain  time  for  negotiations  which 
we  hope  will  result  in  some  satisfactory  adjustment  of  the 
conditions  in  Cuba,  or  in  propositions  on  the  part  of  Spain 
which  ought  to  be  satisfactory  in  the  nature  of  things,  so 
that  we  can  have  presented  to  Congress  and  to  the  people 
the  alternative  of  accepting  a  settlement  of  affairs  in  Cuba 
which  ought  to  be  satisfactory  to  clear  and  reasoning 


Free  Cuba  273 

people,  or  of  going  to  war.  I  believe  that  if  that  alternative 
can  be  presented  the  sober  second  thought  of  the  American 
people  will  keep  us  out  of  war.  As  I  say  the  situation  is 
critical.  Members  of  Congress  are  frightened  to  do  so  lest 
they  should  be  defeated  in  case  absolute  independence  is 
not  secured  either  by  negotiation  or  by  hostilities.  The 
President  has  been  very  doubtful  whether  he  could  hold 
Congress  in  check  but  I  think  has  now  come  to  the  con 
clusion  that  the  conservative  element  in  Congress  will  stand 
by  him.  The  pressure,  however,  for  immediate  action  and 
intervention  is  very  strong. 

Now,  I  have  told  you  all  that  any  one  can  know.  It  may 
come  to  war  before  the  week  is  out.  I  think  it  will  drift 
along  for  some  time  to  come,  and  I  hope  that  Spain  may 
be  induced  to  make  propositions  which  under  the  circum 
stances  ought  to  be  satisfactory.  I  think  I  see  the  em 
barrassment  you  feel.  If  you  should  call  a  special  session 
of  the  Legislature  to  put  the  National  Guard  in  a  state  of 
efficiency,  it  would,  of  course,  add  at  once  to  the  general 
alarm.  The  tension  is  so  great  that  anything  done  looking 
even  remotely  to  hostilities  tends  to  inflame  public  senti 
ment.  I  suppose  that  letters  have  been  written  to  you  as 
to  the  governors  of  New  York  and  Massachusetts  asking 
what  could  be  relied  upon  from  the  State  in  case  of  necessity. 
The  condition  as  it  seems  to  me  is  serious  enough,  so  that  it 
would  be  well  for  you  to  come  down  and  talk  it  over  with 
the  President  and  Secretary  of  War. 

A  third  letter,  addressed  to  John  H.  Flagg,  contains 
this  paragraph : 

I  suppose  that  the  President  for  two  or  three  weeks 
has  been  trying  by  such  indirect  methods  as  he  may  em 
ploy  to  get  Spain  to  consent  to  a  liberal  government  in 
Cuba ;  Canada  and  Australia  being  suggested  as  models. 
I  think  that  if  Spain  would  give  that  degree  of  freedom  to 
Cuba,  it  would  get  the  moral  support  at  least  of  the  United 


274  Orville  H.  Platt 

States.  Speaking  without  information,  I  suppose  that 
Spain  has  shown  some  inclination  in  this  direction.  It 
has  been  understood  here  by  those  who  have  the  President's 
confidence,  that  there  would  be  no  objection  on  the  part 
of  Spain  to  our  sending  supplies  to  the  sufferers,  and  there 
is  evidently  something,  I  do  not  know  how  much,  in  this 
idea  of  an  armistice,  probably  not  a  technical  armistice, 
but  some  cessation  of  hostilities  while  our  negotiations  are 
pending.  To  this  extent  there  is  probably  foundation  for 
the  rumors  in  New  York,  but  I  do  not  think  the  situation 
clears  up  any.  I  think,  as  I  telegraphed  you,  that  the 
sentiment  that  there  must  be  immediate  action  to  the  end 
that  the  conflict  in  Cuba  shall  cease,  is  growing,  and  is  every 
day  becoming  more  difficult  to  hold  in  check,  and  it  has 
been  a  question  all  the  while  whether  if  Spain  should  propose 
anything  short  of  absolute  independence,  no  matter  how 
liberal  and  just  it  might  be,  Congress  would  support  the 
President  in  the  acceptance  of  it  or  insist  upon  going  to 
war.  I  have  felt  that  the  Congress  would  stand  by  the 
President,  but  I  am  getting  a  little  shaky  about  it  to-day. 
We  had  last  week  the  Democrats  pretty  solidly  agreeing  to 
stand  by  the  President  and  now  they  show  a  disposition  to 
make  their  support  conditioned  on  knowing  what  he  is 
going  to  do  to  put  an  end  to  conditions  in  Cuba.  I  cannot 
give  you  any  more  complete  statement  of  the  situation.  I 
understand  that  speeches  advocating  intervention  are  to  be 
kept  up  in  the  Senate.  Foraker  and  Billy  Mason  are  going 
to  speak,  and  it  is  rumored  that  Frye  is.  What  the  Foreign 
Relations  Committee,  which  meets  on  Wednesday,  will  do  no 
one  knows.  It  has  been  thought  that  they  might  report 
an  intervention  resolution,  and  then  again  we  have  thought 
that  they  would  not  do  it  until  the  President  was  ready  for 
intervention,  and  that  if  they  did  do  it,  .we  could  beat  it  in 
the  Senate;  but  everything  seems  unsettled  to-day. 

About  the  same  time  he  gave  to  the  press  the  follow 
ing  brief  interview: 


Free  Cuba  275 

I  think  there  is  altogether  too  rrluch  war  talk.  War 
is  only  to  be  contemplated  with  horror  and  should  not  be 
flippantly  talked  about.  The  United  States  must  never 
engage  in  war  except  as  a  necessity,  the  necessity  of  de 
fending  its  possessions  or  its  honor.  We  must  have  no 
war  unless  we  have  a  cause  which  shall  justify  it  in  the 
eyes  of  the  world  and  to  our  own  conscience.  I  do  not 
think  the  sober  second  thought  of  the  American  people 
is  for  war,  and  I  believe  that  our  relations  with  Spain  are 
susceptible  of  an  amicable  adjustment. 

The  report  of  the  naval  board  placing  the  responsi 
bility  for  the  destruction  of  the  Maine  upon  Spanish 
agencies  brought  negotiations  up  with  a  sharp  turn.  It 
then  became  a  question  of  days  as  to  when  the  President 
should  send  a  message  to  Congress  which  should  serve 
as  the  foundation  of  resolutions  providing  for  inter 
vention  by  the  United  States.  In  the  tenseness  of 
feeling  all  over  the  United  States  every  delay  of  twenty- 
four  hours  seemed  an  eternity;  and  the  more  earnest 
of  the  war  party  in  Congress  were  suspicious  of  every 
postponement  as  an  endeavor  on  the  part  of  the 
administration  to  secure  some  kind  of  adjustment  which 
would  involve  peace  at  the  price  of  honor. 

Finally  it  was  given  out  that  the  message  would  be 
sent  in  on  Monday,  April  4th.  Then  word  came  that 
it  would  surely  go  to  Congress  on  Wednesday,  April  6th. 
On  that  day  the  Capitol  was  crowded  with  an  expectant 
throng;  but  no  message  came.  Instead,  the  leaders  of 
House  and  Senate  were  summoned  to  the  White  House 
where  the  President  showed  them  a  dispatch  from 
Consul-General  Lee  saying  that  if  the  message  went  in 
that  day,  he  could  not  answer  for  the  lives  of  Americans 
in  Havana  and  asking  until  Saturday  to  get  them  out 
of  Cuba. 


276  Orville  H.  Platt 

For  this  memorable  time  Senator  Platt 's  letters  to 
his  friend  Flagg  almost  constitute  a  diary.  Writing 
on  April  2d,  he  says: 

There  is  not  a  great  deal  to  be  said  to-day.  If  the 
President  has  made  up  his  mind  as  to  the  particular  points 
of  his  message  to  present  to  Congress  he  has  not  communi 
cated  the  same  in  detail  even  to  the  members  of  his  Cabinet 
yet.  He  has  been  much  in  consultation  with  Judge  Day, 
and  with  the  Attorney- General.  He  still  wants,  if  possible, 
to  avoid  any  immediate  declaration  of  war  by  Congress, 
has  still  some  hope  that  further  negotiations  may  result 
more  favorably.  The  difficulty  is  to  get  at  it.  Spain's 
answer  seems  to  have  closed  the  door  to  everything  except 
an  ultimatum.  He  has  not  yet  said  even  what  he  thinks 
it  would  be  wise  for  Congress  to  do ;  he  has  taken  to-day  and 
to-morrow  to  put  his  message  in  shape.  Very  much  depends 
upon  his  message.  Congress,  as  indicated  last  night,  is 
considerably  sobered  by  the  situation,  but  I  think  in  each 
House  they  are  anxious  that  action  be  inaugurated  looking 
to  hostilities.  The  situation  is  very  awkward.  Spain,  by 
reason  of  the  rescinding  of  the  reconcentration  order  and 
the  application  of  $600,000  to  care  for  the  suffering,  has 
taken  the  humanitarian  motive  quite  out  of  the  question,  and 
men  who  have  been  for  war  at  all  events,  but  have  been 
putting  it  on  the  ground  of  humanity,  now  find  that  they 
must  seek  other  grounds.  They  have  been  declaring  that 
they  did  not  propose  to  go  to  war  on  account  of  the  destruc 
tion  of  the  Maine,  and  now  that  seems  to  be  the  real  ground 
on  which  they  must  proceed,  if  they  can  bring  this  at  all 
within  any  international  rules.  It  is  impossible  to  say  to-day 
what  will  take  place  Monday,  and  the  President  may  not  get 
his  message  ready  so  as  to  send  it  in  Monday,  perhaps  Tues 
day.  I  think  I  know  pretty  nearly  as  well  as  any  one  the 
President's  mind,  but  I  do  not  know  precisely  what  he  is 
going  to  say  or  do.  I  think  he  is  still  deliberating.  There 
is  not  any  very  logical  ground  for  a  declaration  of  war,  and 


Free  Cuba  277 

those  who  have  been  most  eager  for  it  are  casting  about 
for  reasons  to  give  for  it. 

On  April  6th,  again  writing  Mr.  Flagg,  Senator  Platt 
said: 

As  I  telegraphed  you  this  morning,  I  think  the  hope  of  a 
peaceful  solution  is  pretty  much  gone.  The  Foreign  Rela 
tions  Committee  seems  to  have  made  up  its  mind  in  advance 
of  the  message  and  at  the  present  moment  is  writing  per 
haps  a  resolution  which  will  recognize  the  independence  of 
Cuba,  and,  counting  on  the  destruction  of  the  Maine,  which, 
it  says,  was  either  a  criminal  act  or  negligence  equally  crimi 
nal  on  the  part  of  Spain,  the  barbarous  and  inhuman  warfare, 
and  its  inability  to  maintain  a  government  on  the  island, 
demands  the  withdrawal  of  its  troops,  and  authorizes  the 
President  to  use  the  military  and  naval  forces  of  the  United 
States  including  the  militia  to  that  end.  A  good  many  of 
us  believe  the  recognition  of  independence  is  entirely  un 
necessary  and  would  like  something  in  the  way  of  a  reso 
lution  which  will  give  Spain  an  opportunity  to  back  down 
before  actual  hostilities  are  begun  on  our  part.  But 
the  war  party  is  evidently  in  the  majority  and  will  push 
its  views  thinking  that  no  one  dare  stand  up  against  it. 
While  I  say  this  it  must  be  added  that  the  Foreign  Relations 
Committee  is  not  unanimous  in  insisting  on  the  recognition 
of  independence  and  it  is  possible  that  by  to-morrow  that 
feature  may  be  dropped.  It  is  said  that  the  message  is  not 
likely  to  go  to  the  Senate  before  three  or  four  o'clock  to 
morrow  afternoon.  It  will  be  referred  to  the  Committee 
I  think  without  debate  and  no  report  will  be  made  by  the 
Committee  until  Thursday.  The  reason  for  this  delay  until 
late  in  the  afternoon  is  that  our  consuls  may  have  time  to 
get  away  from  Havana  and  the  island.  The  Fern  has 
been  ordered  to  bring  them  away.  There  seems  to  be  a 
question  whether,  if  this  resolution  should  pass  in  the  form 
which  the  Foreign  Relations  Committee  now  contemplate, 
it  would  be  equivalent  to  a  declaration  of  war  or  whether 


278  Orville  H.  Platt 

it  would  be  the  duty  of  the  President  first  to  communicate 
the  demands  contained  in  the  resolution  to  Spain  and  get  an 
answer  from  Spain  before  the  commencement  of  actual 
hostilities. 

I  have  given  you  in  a  few  words  I  think  the  situation. 
There  will  I  hope  be  a  conference  to-night  between  the 
Committee  on  Foreign  Relations  and  the  President  in  the 
hope  that  the  resolution  to  be  reported  may  be  in  accordance 
with  his  views,  but  Foraker  has  seemed  to  dominate  the 
Committee  and  any  change  will  have  to  be  over  his  head. 

On  April  7th,  he  further  wrote  Mr.  Flagg,  as  follows: 

There  is  really  no  change  in  the  situation  to-day ;  unless 
Spain  between  now  and  Monday  gives  assurances  that  she 
will  give  up  Cuba,  Congress  will  take  some  action  in 
sisting  upon  that  as  the  only  condition  of  peace.  The 
precise  character  of  the  resolution  is  understood.  The 
President  and  those  who  sustain  him  do  not  want  a  recog 
nition  of  independence,  do  not  want  any  haste,  but  a  simple 
resolution  directing  the  President  to  take  at  once  such 
steps  as  may  be  necessary  to  terminate  hostilities  in  Cuba, 
to  form  a  stable  government  there,  and  to  this  end  to  em 
ploy  the  land  and  naval  forces  of  the  United  States.  Jingoes 
want  independence  and  intervention.  The  contest  between 
the  President  and  his  opposers  will  go  along  this  line.  Yester 
day  we  could  have  passed  such  a  resolution  as  we  desired 
in  the  Senate,  but  the  startling  dispatch  of  Lee  upset 
everyone.  To-day  we  are  looking  up  again — to-morrow 
we  may  be  demoralized.  It  is  comparatively  quiet  here. 

The  message  came  in  on  April  nth.  Resolutions 
were  promptly  reported  in  Senate  and  House.  Those  re 
ported  in  the  House  followed  the  moderate  lines  of  the 
President's  message.  They  directed  the  President 
to  intervene  at  once  to  stop  the  war  in  Cuba: 

To  the  end  and  with  the  purpose  of  securing  permanent 
peace  and  order  there,  and  establishing  by  the  free  action 


Free  Cuba  279 

of  the  people  thereof  a  stable  and  independent  government 
of  their  own  in  the  island  of  Cuba, 

and  authorized  the  President  to  use  the  land  and 
naval  forces  to  execute  the  purpose  of  the  resolution. 
This  phraseology  did  not  meet  the  requirements  of 
those  who  insisted  that  Congress  should  demand,  with 
out  equivocation,  the  expulsion  of  Spain  from  Cuba. 
The  resolutions  reported  as  a  substitute  by  the  Senate 
Committee  on  Foreign  Relations  were  longer  and  had 
a  fighting  edge : 

WHEREAS  the  abhorrent  conditions  which  have  existed 
for  more  than  three  years  in  the  island  of  Cuba,  so  near 
our  own  borders,  have  shocked  the  moral  sense  of  the  people 
of  the  United  States,  have  been  a  disgrace  to  Christian 
civilization,  culminating,  as  they  have,  in  the  destruction 
of  a  United  States  battleship,  with  226  of  its  officers  and 
crew,  while  on  a  friendly  visit  in  the  harbor  of  Havana,  and 
can  not  longer  be  endured,  as  has  been  set  forth  by  the 
President  of  the  United  States  in  his  message  to  Congress 
of  April  n,  1898,  upon  which  the  action  of  Congress  was 
invited;  Therefore, 

Resolved,  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives 
of  the  United  States  of  America  in  Congress  assembled, 

First:  That  the  people  of  the  island  of  Cuba  are,  and  of 
right  ought  to  be,  free  and  independent. 

Second:  That  it  is  the  duty  of  the  United  States  to  demand 
and  the  Government  of  the  United  States  does  hereby 
demand,  that  the  Government  of  Spain  at  once  relinquish 
its  authority  and  government  in  the  island  of  Cuba,  and 
withdraw  its  land  and  naval  forces  from  Cuba  and  Cuban 
waters. 

Third:  That  the  President  of  the  United  States  be,  and 
he  hereby  is,  directed  and  empowered  to  use  the  entire 
land  and  naval  forces  of  the  United  States,  and  to  call  into 
the  actual  service  of  the  United  States  the  militia  of  the 


280  Orville  H.  Platt 

several  States,  to  such  extent  as  may  be  necessary  to  carry 
these  resolutions  into  effect. 

A  minority  of  the  Committee,  consisting  of  three 
Democrats  and  Senator  Foraker,  proposed  to  amend 
the  first  paragraph  by  inserting  after  the  word  "  inde 
pendent"  the  following: 

And  that  the  Government  of  the  United  States  hereby 
recognize  the  republic  of  Cuba  as  the  true  and  lawful  gover- 
ment  of  that  island. 

There  at  once  arose  a  spirited  debate  wherein  bitter 
attacks  were  made  upon  the  motives  of  the  administra 
tion.  A  little  band  of  ten  Republicans,  headed  by 
Chandler  and  Foraker,  stood  out  with  the  Democrats 
and  Populists  for  the  minority  amendment,  and  that 
amendment  was  adopted  by  a  vote  of  51  to  37.  The 
entire  debate  turned  on  this  question.  The  real 
question  of  peace  and  war,  contained  in  the  second 
paragraph,  was  quite  lost  sight  of — even  to  the  point 
where  the  House  concurred  in  the  Senate  resolutions 
with  an  amendment  striking  out  the  words,  "are  and" 
in  the  first  paragraph  and  the  entire  clause  embody 
ing  the  recognition  of  the  insurgent  government.  Sen 
ator  Platt  entered  earnestly  into  the  debate.  On  April 
1 6th,  he  delivered  one  of  the  strongest  and  most  impres 
sive  speeches  of  his  entire  career  in  opposition  to  the 
proposed  amendment. 

In  beginning  the  speech  he  said: 

The  time  for  oratory  and  impassioned  utterance  has 
passed.  The  time  has  never  been  for  hot  words,  for  epi 
thets,  for  intemperate  speech.  Oratory  will  not  bombard 
Morro  Castle.  Stinging  words,  ungracious  and  unjust 
epithets  may  reach  and  wound  the  President  of  the  United 
States  but  they  will  not  pierce  the  armor  of  Spanish  battle 
ships. 


Free  Cuba  281 

His  concluding  words  were : 

We  ought  to  pass  resolutions  here  which  we  can  justify. 
We  ought  not  to  give  our  consent  to  resolutions  unjustifi 
able  in  their  character,  for  the  reason  that  we.  desire  to  ac 
complish  the  great  purpose  in  view.  When  Abraham 
Lincoln  put  his  name  to  that  immortal  document  which 
struck  the  shackles  from  the  limbs  of  4,000,000  people, 
after  having  suffered  abuse,  vituperation,  vilification  which 
the  abuse  heaped  upon  President  McKinley  does  not 
parallel,  he  wrote  these  magnificent  words: 

"And  upon  this  act,  sincerely  believed  to  be  an  act  of 
justice  warranted  by  the  Constitution  upon  military 
necessity,  I  invoke  the  deliberate  judgment  of  mankind 
and  the  gracious  favor  of  Almighty  God." 

Mr.  President,  I  implore,  I  adjure  the  Senate  to  pass 
no  resolutions  upon  which  it  may  not  write  in  spirit,  if  not 
in  fact,  the  words: 

"And  upon  this  act  we  invoke  the  deliberate  judgment 
of  mankind,  and  the  gracious  favor  of  Almighty  God." 

The  resolutions  as  amended  were  adopted  by  the 
Senate  by  vote  of  67  to  21,  Mr.  Platt  helping  to  form 
the  minority  which  consisted  of  19  Republicans  and 
2  Democrats,  and  after  a  day  and  night  of  intense 
dramatic  interest,  the  House,  in  the  early  morning  of 
April  i gth,  accepted  the  Senate  resolutions  word  for 
word.  They  were  signed  by  the  President  on  April 
2ist>  and  war  was  on. 

After  the  passage  of  the  resolutions  Senator  Platt 
dictated — exactly  for  what  purpose  does  not  appear — 
the  following  statement  which  may  be  taken  as  an 
epitome  of  his  position : 

These  resolutions  mean  too  little  or  too  much.  If  they 
do  not  mean  that  there  is  now  in  the  island  of  Cuba  a  free 
and  independent  government,  then  to  whom  is  Spain  to 


282  Orville  H.  Platt 

relinquish  its  authority  and  government?  And  when  it 
has  been  compelled  to  withdraw  its  land  and  naval  forces, 
what  then  ?  The  President  has  asked  that  he  be  empowered 
to  take  measures  after  the  securing  of  the  full  and  final  ter 
mination  of  hostilities,  to  secure  the  establishment  of  a  stable 
government,  etc.  These  resolutions  refuse  to  grant  him 
that  authority.  Under  these  resolutions  it  will  be  the  duty 
of  the  President  to  withdraw  the  forces  simultaneously  with 
the  forces  of  Spain.  If  there  is  no  government  recognized 
by  these  resolutions,  except  the  government  of  Spain,  we 
should  certainly  see  that  one  is  established  before  our  troops 
are  withdrawn.  If  there  is  one,  certainly  nothing  else  can 
be  meant  by  the  resolutions  than  that  it  is  recognized  as  a 
government.  I  believe  the  legal  and  practical  effect  of  the 
first  resolution  is  to  recognize  the  sovereignty  of  the  pre 
tended  self-government  of  the  insurgents.  What  else  can 
the  resolutions  mean?  The  people  are  free  and  indepen 
dent.  Do  they  use  these  words  only  in  the  sense  that  they 
would  apply  to  mankind  in  general  ?  Every  one  knows  that 
that  phrase  is  used  to  designate  a  free  government.  So 
we  see  clearly  the  purpose  of  these  resolutions.  First, — 
to  do  affirmatively  what  the  President  recommends  us  not 
to  do.  Second, — to  refuse  to  do  what  he  asks  us  to  do — a 
most  impotent  conclusion  as  ever  was. 

First  I  wish  to  state  my  conviction  and  position  and  to 
state  it  so  clearly  that  I  will  not  be  misconstrued  or  mis 
understood.  The  time  has  come  when  Spanish  rule  in 
Cuba  must  cease — it  has  been  too  long  a  record  of  misrule 
only.  I  will  not  pause  to  frame  the  indictment.  The 
reasons  why  it  must  cease  are  known  to  all  Americans  and 
are  set  forth  clearly,  forcibly,  and  patriotically  in  the 
message  of  the  President  of  the  United  States.  It  has 
imperilled  our  peace,  it  has  inflicted  injuries  upon  us,  it  is 
inconsistent  with  our  commercial  and  national  interests, 
it  outrages  every  sentiment  of  mankind,  it  makes  against 
all  civilization.  It  must  end.  With  this  conviction  and 
this  unassailable  purpose  I  have  hoped  and,  until  recently, 


Free  Cuba  283 

believed  that  it  might  be  ended  without  war,  without  the 
burdens  and  horrors  and  the  losses  of  war.  I  believe 
to-day  that  what  I,  together  with  all  America's  citizens, 
desired  might  have  been  accomplished  peaceably  had  it  not 
been  for  the  intemperate  and  inflammatory  statements  and 
misstatements  of  those  who  from  the  first  have  desired  to 
plunge  this  country  into  war.  I  have  not  been  among  those 
who  desired  war.  I  would  if  possible  have  averted  it, 
never  for  a  moment  losing  sight  of  the  purpose  to  be  ac 
complished.  And  I  have  only  unstinted  praise  to  bestow 
upon,  and  the  heartiest  thanks  to  give  to  the  President  of 
the  United  States,  in  the  execution  of  the  great  responsibil 
ity  that  has  desired  the  attainment  of  the  end  in  view 
through  peace  rather  than  through  war.  To  longer  hope 
that  the  Spanish  misrule  in  Cuba  can  be  ended  peaceably 
seems  to  be  against  hope.  From  the  position  taken  by  the 
President  of  the  United  States  upon  the  failure  of  diplomatic 
negotiations,  to  secure  the  emancipation  of  Cuba,  the  United 
States  cannot  recede,  ought  not  to  recede. 

In  the  language  of  the  Executive:  " The  war  in  Cuba  must 
stop,  and  in  that  island  there  must  be  established  a  stable 
government,  capable  of  maintaining  order,"  etc. 

If  this,  our  determination,  results  in  war,  it  must  come. 
We  should  be  false  to  ourselves  and  to  humanity,  to  the 
world,  and  recreant  to  duty  and  cowardly,  if  we  hesitated 
or  faltered  now. 


CHAPTER  XXII 

EXPANSION  AND  IMPERIALISM 

For  Unrelenting  Prosecution  of  the  War — Results  of  the  War 
Accepted — Annexation  of  Hawaii — Urges  Retention  of  Philip 
pines — Letter  to  President  McKinley — Letter  to  Professor 
Fisher — Strongly  Advocates  Ratification  of  Treaty  of  Peace — 
Speech  of  December  19,  1899 — The  Constitutional  Right  of 
the  U.  S.  to  Acquire  and  Govern  Territory. 

A  DMIRAL  SAMPSON'S  fleet  set  sail  for  Cuba  on 
/"\  April  2ist,  and  with  that  act  of  war  there  came 
an  end  to  divergent  policies  in  Washington.  Hence 
forward  there  was  only  one  party  and  that  party  was 
bent  on  prosecuting  the  war  to  a  successful  issue.  For 
the  next  four  months  while  the  American  forces  were 
pressing  the  enemy  by  land  and  by  sea  we  find  Senator 
Platt  lending  his  encouragement  by  voice  and  vote. 
He  accepted  heartily  all  the  results  of  the  war.  When 
the  news  came  on  the  second  of  May  that  Dewey  had 
sailed  with  flaming  guns  into  Manila  Bay,  he  was  not 
one  of  those  who  tempered  praise  of  American  valor 
with  censure  of  a  sailor's  rashness  and  sent  up  prayers 
that  our  ships  should  be  recalled.  Having  set  out  in  the 
path  he  would  follow  it  to  the  end.  The  depths  of  his 
nature  were  stirred.  The  opening  up  of  the  Philip 
pines  to  American  civilization  appealed  to  him  as  a 
religious  opportunity  which  it  would  be  a  national  crime 
to  neglect.  Even  while  the  war  was  still  on,  and  before 
Sampson's  fleet  had  destroyed  Cervera's  ships  off  San- 

284 


Expansion  and  Imperialism  285 

tiago,  the  question  of  expansion  came  to  the  front 
in  resolutions  providing  for  the  annexation  of  the 
Hawaiian  Islands.  This  was  a  question  which  had  been 
inherited  by  the  McKinley  administration.  From  the 
time  in  February,  1892,  when  President  Harrison  had 
sent  the  treaty  of  the  annexation  to  the  Senate  down 
through  the  unfortunate  experiences  of  the  Cleveland 
administration  with  " Paramount"  Blount,  and  his 
great  and  good  friend,  Liliuokalani,  the  Hawaiian 
question  had  developed  into  one  of  party  policy,  al 
though  a  few  eminent  and  powerful  Republicans  had 
ranged  themselves  strongly  against  the  idea  of  acquiring 
insular  territory.  Senator  Platt  had  little  patience 
with  the  position  assumed  by  the  reactionaries  who 
chirped  assent  to  Speaker  Reed's  motto—  "Empire 
can  wait."  In  the  second  session  of  the  Fifty-third 
Congress  resolutions  had  been  presented  in  the  Senate 
looking  to  the  pacification  of  the  Sandwich  Islands. 
One  of  the  paragraphs  of  the  resolutions  declared  ' '  that 
it  is  unwise  and  inexpedient  under  existing  conditions 
to  consider  at  this  time  any  project  of  annexation  of 
the  Hawaiian  territory  to  the  United  States."  Senator 
Platt  favored  the  general  import  of  the  resolutions  as 
did  many  other  Republican  Senators  but  to  this  declara 
tion  he  refused  to  subscribe.  He  made  his  position 
clear  in  a  brief  speech  on  January  24,  1894.  He  said: 

I  do  not  believe  that  the  annexation  of  the  Hawaiian 
Islands  to  the  United  States  would  violate  either  the-  pro 
claimed  or  the  traditional  policy  of  the  United  States. 
I  believe  on  the  other  hand  it  would  be  consonant  with  and 
in  accord  with  both  the  proclaimed  and  the  traditional 
policy  of  the  United  States.  I  believe  it  would  be  in  direct 
line  with  all  that  has  been  said  by  Presidents  and  Secretaries 
of  State  in  reference  to  this  subject  for  the  last  fifty  years.  I 


286  Orville  H.  Platt 

believe  it  would  be  in  direct  line  with  all  the  movements  for 
annexation  which  have  taken  place  heretofore  in  our  his 
tory.  I  believe  when  we  have  come  to  be  sixty-five — yes, 
seventy  million  people,  nearly,  we  can  no  longer  shut  our 
selves  within  narrow  limits ;  and  while  I  have  no  disposition 
to  acquire  territory  for  the  sake  of  territory,  for  the  sake  of 
aggrandizement  or  glory  or  power,  I  firmly  believe  that 
when  any  territory  outside  of  the  present  limits  of  the 
United  States  becomes  necessary  for  our  defence  or  essential 
for  our  commercial  development,  we  ought  to  lose  no  time 
in  acquiring  it,  if  it  can  be  done  without  injustice  to  other 
nations  and  other  people. 

From  this  position  he  never  swerved.  When  the 
resolutions  of  annexation  came  before  the  Senate  in 
the  summer  of  1898  he  voted  for  them  and  aided  in  the 
debate  against  those  who  argued  for  purposes  of  delay 
that  the  business  should  be  undertaken  by  treaty 
instead  of  legislative  action ;  and  when  a  little  later  the 
far  more  momentous  question  of  acquiring  the  Philip 
pine  Islands  during  the  negotiations  of  the  treaty  of 
peace  with  Spain  became  absorbing,  Senator  Platt  was 
one  who  insisted  most  stoutly  that  for  the  United 
States  to  abandon  the  Philippines  would  be  a  colossal 
error,  to  be  regretted  forever. 

The  protocol  looking  to  the  treaty  which  brought  the 
war  to  an  end  was  approved  at  Madrid  on  August  1 1 , 
1898.  The  air  was  full  of  rumors  that  in  drafting  a 
treaty  of  peace  the  administration  would  agree  to  with 
draw  American  forces  from  the  Philippines  and  leave 
them  again  in  the  hands  of  Spain.  That  it  was  the 
inclination  of  the  President  at  that  time  to  accept  just 
as  few  responsibilities  as  possible  in  the  far  East  was  well 
understood.  In  theory  that  may  have  been  the  wisest 
position  for  an  administration  to  assume.  But  it  was 


Expansion  and  Imperialism          287 

not  in  harmony  with  the  feeling  of  the  people  of  the 
United  States.  The  most  clear-headed  and  far-seeing 
leaders  of  Congress  perceived  that  the  fact  was  already 
in  effect  accomplished — that  responsibilities  already 
assumed  could  not  be  evaded.  Senator  Platt's  repu 
tation  for  conservatism  and  strength  proved  of  vast 
importance  at  this  crisis.  Others  clustered  about  him 
as  about  an  oak.  He  did  not  waver  from  the  beginning 
in  his  conviction  that  the  United  States  should  retain 
control  of  the  entire  Philippine  group.  The  arguments 
of  the  anti-imperialists  seemed  to  him  preposterous — • 
almost  lacking  in  patriotism.  At  the  time  of  the 
signing  of  the  protocol,  Congress  was  in  recess  and  he 
was  at  his  home  in  Connecticut,  close  in  touch  there 
with  the  heart  of  his  own  people.  It  was  a  time,  he 
thought,  for  communicating  to  President  McKinley  his 
judgment  of  what  should  be  done  and  he  acted  un 
hesitatingly.  Under  date  of  August  15,  1898,  from 
his  home  in  Washington,  Connecticut,  he  wrote  as 
follows : 

DEAR  MR.  PRESIDENT: 

I  feel  that  I  ought  to  say  that  during  the  past  week  I  have 
been  well  over  the  State  of  Connecticut  and  I  am  satisfied 
that  nine  tenths  of  the  people  of  the  State  have  an  intense 
feeling  that  we  should  insist  upon  the  cession  of  all  the 
Philippine  Islands.  Those  who  believe  in  Providence,  see, 
or  think  they  see,  that  God  has  placed  upon  this  Govern 
ment  the  solemn  duty  of  providing  for  the  people  of  these 
islands  a  government  based  upon  the  principle  of  liberty 
no  matter  how  many  difficulties  the  problem  may  present. 
They  feel  that  it  is  our  duty  to  attempt  its  solution.  Among 
Christian,  thoughtful  people  the  sentiment  is  akin  to  that 
which  has  maintained  the  missionary  work  of  the  last 
century  in  foreign  lands.  I  assure  you  that  it  is  difficult  to 
overestimate  the  strength  and  intensity  of  this  sentiment. 


288  Orville  H.  Platt 

If  in  the  negotiations  for  peace  Spain  is  permitted  to  retain 
any  portion  of  the  Philippines  it  will  be  regarded  as  a  failure 
on  the  part  of  this  nation  to  discharge  the  greatest  moral 
obligation  which  could  be  conceived. 

I  have  spoken  of  the  Christian  sentiment  but  the  feeling 
that  we  should  not  allow  Spain  to  retain  possession  of  the 
Philippines  pervades  all  classes  of  our  people.  If  I  am  to 
be  guided  by  the  views  of  the  best  people  in  this  State  and 
the  large  majority  of  -all  the  people,  I  shall  be  compelled 
to  vote  against  any  treaty  which  allows  Spain  to  continue 
to  exercise  sovereignty  over  any  of  the  inhabitants  of 
those  islands. 

Very  respectfully, 

O.  H.  PLATT. 

In  this  brief  letter  to  the  President  was  condensed 
the  entire  argument  for  retaining  the  Philippines.  It 
was  the  expression  of  a  statesman  of  deep  religious 
feeling,  firmly  confident  that  he  was  reading  rightly  the 
pulse  of-  the  people  and  reassured  to  know  that  their 
settled  judgment  coincided  with  his  own.  In  all  the 
months  and  years  of  debate  that  followed  the  signing  of 
the  treaty  of  peace,  no  really  convincing  argument  was 
advanced,  the  germ  of  which  was  not  contained  in  those 
.  few  pregnant  sentences.  Senator  Platt  himself  sub 
sequently  elaborated  his  position  both  in  personal 
letters  and  congressional  debate,  but  never  more 
effectively. 

He  seems  to  have  been  stimulated  by  the  anti- 
expansion  sentiment  which  found  grateful  nurseries 
under  the  elms  of  New  Haven  and  in  the  college  yard 
of  Cambridge.  The  Yale  College  band  of  anti-ex 
pansionists  was  especially  dogmatic  and  self-assertive. 
Mr.  Platt's  personal  relations  with  the  leading  members 
of  the  Yale  faculty  had  always  been  close  and  friendly, 


WASHINGTON 


iU£S 


<  /H 


/ 


FACSIMILE    OF    LETTER   TO    PRESIDENT    McKINLEY    CONCERNING    THE    PHILIPPINE    ISLANDS 


i.'tst 


/I 


6)  alt*    hU 


6) 


L 


fe 


ML 


Au. 


/Vu- 


A. 


-  ty  (^ 


iJ 


Expansion  and  Imperialism  289 

and  therefore  he  was  peculiarly  the  object  of  their 
missionary  zeal.  From  one  of  the  most  eminent  of 
them,  George  P.  Fisher,  Professor  of  Ecclesiastical  His 
tory  in  the  Theological  Department,  he  received,  only 
three  days  prior  to  his  communication  with  President 
McKinley,  an  argumentative  letter  against  the  reten 
tion  of  the  Philippines.  The  immediate  response  to  this 
was  the  luminous  note  to  McKinley;  and  a  few  days 
later  he  disturbed  his  well  earned  summer's  rest  to  write 
a  long  and  comprehensive  letter  to  Professor  Fisher, 
which,  as  a  contemporary  document  throwing  light  on 
the  forces  at  work  to  determine  the  issue  of  an  historic 
time,  may  profitably  be  reproduced  here: 

I  have  yours  of  the  twelfth  instant,  and  I  think  so  much 
of  your  opinion  that  I  want,  if  I  can,  to  outline  briefly  the 
reasons  which  induce  me  to  think  we  ought  to  insist  on 
American  control  of  the  Philippines. 

First, — There  is  no  sovereignty  there  to-day  but  ours. 
Spain  in  surrendering  Manila  has  lost  her  sovereignty  and 
cannot  regain  it  unless  we  give  it  to  her.  We  did  not 
covet  or  seek  possession  of  the  islands;  that  has  come  to 
us  in  the  course  of  events  we  did  not  foresee  and  which 
we  were  powerless  to  control.  When  as  a  necessary  step 
in  the  war  with  Spain  orders  were  sent  to  destroy  the 
Spanish  ships,  there  was  never  a  thought  of  acquisition; 
Providence  foreshaped  the  events  which  forced  upon  us  the 
question,  what  should  be  done  with  those  islands  ?  If  we 
had  withdrawn  our  fleet  after  the  Spanish  ships  were  de 
stroyed,  the  insurgents  with  whom  wisely  or  unwisely  we 
were  acting  in  concert,  would  have  been  abandoned  to  the 
mercy  of  the  Spanish.  In  a  certain  sense  they  were  our 
allies.  We  had  espoused  their  contest  for  liberty  such 
as  it  was.  If  from  a  humanitarian  standpoint  we  were  im 
pelled  to  assist  Cuban  insurgents,  we  could  not  in  decency 
abandon  the  Philippine  insurgents.  If  this  was  a  war  for 
19 


29o  Orville  H.  Platt 

humanity,  Spain's  inhumanity  in  the  Philippines  was  as 
flagrant  as  in  Cuba.  If  you  say  Cuba  was  nearer,  the 
answer  is  plain — the  duty  of  succoring  the  oppressed  is  not 
limited  by  distance — only  by  present  ability  to  afford  it, 
and  we  were  there  and  able  to  discharge  that  duty.  If  it 
had  been  in  our  power  to  succor  Armenia,  we  should  not 
have  withheld  aid  because  of  the  distance.  We  did  not 
withdraw — we  accepted  the  consequences  of  our  first  step, 
we  are  there,  in  control,  in  real  occupation  and  authority 
and  charged  with  all  the  responsibility  and  obligation  that 
comes  with  that  occupation  and  authority.  What  then 
shall  we  do? 

Second, — There  are  several  things  we  may  do.  We  might 
have  relinquished  all  we  had  gained,  given  up  all  claim  to 
authority,  ignored  all  demands  of  duty  and  all  sense  of 
obligation ;  left  Spain  and  the  insurgents  to  fight  it  out.  But 
is  there  any  one  in  the  world  who  thinks  we  ought  to  have 
done  that?  The  mere  suggestion  brings  a  blush  of  shame 
to  the  cheek  of  every  American.  But  we  cannot  do  that. 
The  procotol  provides  that  we  are  to  keep  the  bay  and  port 
of  Manila.  That  is  settled.  From  that  we  cannot  recede. 
We  have  already  stipulated  for  and  secured  more  than  a 
coaling  or  naval  station.  We  have  acquired  that  much 
territory  and  we  must  hold  and  govern  it. 

Shall  we  then  let  Spain  repossess  a  portion  of  the  island 
of  Luzon  and  all  other  islands  and  sit  by  indifferently  while 
the  conflict  between  Spain  and  her  revolted  people  goes  on, 
careless  spectators  of  results,  assenting  to  her  cruelty, 
injustice,  and  oppression  if  Spain  succeeds,  assenting  to 
universal  loot  and  plunder  perhaps,  if  the  insurgents  suc 
ceed,  powerless  to  interfere?  I  cannot  but  believe  that  to 
allow  Spain  to  retain  any  portion  of  those  islands  would  be 
to  invite  endless  complication,  trouble,  and  conflict.  Re 
member  that  Spanish  authority  and  Spanish  sovereignty 
are  of  the  past.  Shall  we  invite  other  powers,  England, 
Germany,  Russia,  or  France,  any  or  all  of  them,  to  take  our 
possessions  off  our  hands  because  we  are  in  doubt  how  best 


Expansion  and  Imperialism  291 

to  deal  with  them  ?  Think  of  the  friction  which  that  would 
surely  create.  Manila  now  is  the  port  of  commerce  of  all 
the  islands,  it  flows  into  and  out  of  that  port  naturally. 
Any  other  nation  possessing  the  rest  of  the  islands  would 
seek  to  divert  the  commerce  to  a  port  of  its  own.  We 
should  seek  to  retain  it  and  bad  blood  would  at  once  be 
stirred  up.  But  as  I  have  before  said,  we  are  in  control 
now.  By  conquest  all  the  Philippines  are  ours  unless  we 
relinquish  them.  Are  we  not  then  under  the  most  impera 
tive  moral  obligation  to  protect  that  people  and  establish 
there  such  a  government  as  is  best  adapted  to  their  need 
and  condition  ?  If  they  are  entitled  by  Divine  endowment 
to  "life,  liberty,  and  the  pursuit  of  happiness"  are  we  not 
bound  to  protect  them  in  their  enjoyment  so  far  as  it  may 
be  done?  Who  can  do  it  better  than  we?  Who  can  do  it 
so  well  ?  Shall  we  deliberately  shirk  the  duty  because  we 
fear  that  its  performance  may  be  attended  with  difficulty? 

Third, — We  of  this  country  have  always  asserted  our 
firm  belief  in  an  overruling  Providence.  We  have  pro 
fessed  to  recognize  the  hand  of  God  in  history.  Does  not 
Providence,  does  not  the  finger  of  God  unmistakably  point 
to  the  civilization  and  uplifting  of  the  Orient,  to  the  develop 
ment  of  its  people,  to  the  spread  of  liberty,  education, 
social  order,  and  Christianity  there  through  the  agency  of 
American  influence  ?  Can  any  man,  even  the  least  thought 
ful,  fail  to  see  that  the  next  great  world  wave  of  civilization 
is  to  overspread  China,  and  how  much  that  means?  What 
kind  of  civilization  is  it  to  be,  Russian,  German,  French? 
Or  shall  it  be  the  civilization  of  the  English-speaking  people, 
led  indeed  by  the  United  States? 

Fourth, — So  far  as  to  duty,  in  this  case  duty  and  interest 
coincide.  American  civilization  and  institutions  will  go 
only  where  our  trade  goes — "Trade  follows  the  flag" — 
civilization  goes  along  with  trade.  The  missionary  may 
be  the  pioneer  of  civilization  but  he  works  at  a  terrible 
disadvantage  amid  the  institutions  of  heathenism.  Com 
merce  clothes  the  missionary  with  power. 


Orville  H.  Platt 

We  must  stand  with  England  or  England  stand  with  us 
for  "the  open  door"  in  China.  Neither  can  keep  the  door 
open  alone.  Combined,  the  rest  of  the  world  is  powerless 
to  shut  it.  Can  you  fail  to  see  that  in  the  Providence  of 
God  the  time  has  come  when  the  institutions  of  the  English- 
speaking  people  are  in  final  conflict  with  the  institutions  of 
despotism  and  irreligion,  and  that  China  is  the  battle 
ground?  The  nations  that  control  the  commerce  of  China 
will  impress  their  institutions  upon  that  people.  Have 
we  no  call  to  that  conflict?  Again  we  can  only  be  truly 
great  as  we  reach  out  beyond  ourselves.  Selfishness  is 
poverty  and  misery  both.  To  lose  a  man's  life  is  to  save  it, 
and  this  is  as  true  of  a  nation  as  of  a  man.  The  national 
policy  of  isolation  is  no  longer  for  our  best  interest.  To 
pursue  it  with  all  that  is  claimed  for  it  by  its  advocates  is 
national  selfishness.  When  we  were  weak  in  numbers  and  in 
resources  it  was  a  good  policy,  but  a  nation  of  seventy-five 
millions  of  people,  greater  in  resources  and  power  than  any 
other  nation,  can  no  longer,  in  justice  to.  itself  or  humanity, 
insist  on  isolation.  We  are  first  in  the  family  of  nations;  the 
head  of  the  family  has  no  right  to  disclaim  an  interest  in 
the  welfare  of  the  other  members.  If  we  are  to  let  our 
light  shine  as  you  say,  must  we  not  carry  it  where  it  can  be 
seen?  Is  it  quite  enough  to  have  a  statue  of  liberty  en 
lightening  the  world  at  the  entrance  of  New  York  harbor  ? 

Speaking  in  a  selfish  and  materialistic  sense,  no  nation  can 
be  great  in  the  truest  sense  until  it  takes  its  full  share  of  the 
commerce  of  the  world,  till  it  is  as  strong  on  the  sea  as  on 
the  land.  With  commerce  come  riches  and  power  and  true 
greatness  as  well  as  the  opportunity  to  benefit  the  world. 

Shall  we  reach  out  beyond  ourselves,  shall  we  go  forward 
or  stand  still  ?  If  we  would  maintain  ourselves  in  the  front 
rank  we  must  go  forward.  We  must  claim  and  secure  our 
fair  share  of  the  opening  trade  of  the  East.  With  the  Philip 
pines  we  are  in  a  position  to  demand  it,  without  them  we 
have  no  advantage  of  position,  and  can  be  easily  ignored. 
With  Hawaii,  Guam,  and  the  Philippines  we  have  three 


Expansion  and  Imperialism  293 

almost  equidistant  stations  on  the  shortest  route  which 
any  nation  has  to  China  with  its  trade  now  marvellously 
to  expand. 

Fifth, — But  why  can  we  not  Americanize  the  Philippines? 
Is  American  enterprise  and  influence  limited  in  these  days 
of  steam  and  electricity  by  the  distance  between  us  and 
them?  Have  we  not  Americanized  the  Sandwich  Islands 
where  we  had  no  government  control,  and  were  they  not 
weeks  farther  away  from  us  when  our  missionaries  first 
went  there  than  the  Philippines  now  are?  Are  we  not 
nearer  to  the  Philippines  now  than  we  were  to  London  in  the 
days  of  the  Revolution  ?  Nearer  than  we  were  to  California 
in  1840?  Are  the  Filipinos  more  barbarous,  savage,  and 
untamable  than  were  the  Sandwich  Islanders  ?  Have  they 
not  at  least  shown  a  longing  for  liberty  as  they  understand 
it,  when  they  have  thus  maintained  this  warfare  against 
Spanish  misrule  and  injustice?  Nor  can  I  understand  why 
it  is  supposed  to  be  necessary  to  incorporate  them  into  our 
political  community  in  any  dangerous  sense. 

Has  England  incorporated  South  Africa  into  its  political 
community?  In  a  certain  sense  it  has,  but  only  in  the 
sense  that  it  exercises  control  and  provides  for  the  people 
that  come  under  its  sway  a  better  government  than  they 
ever  enjoyed  otherwise,  and  the  government  best  calculated 
for  their  happiness,  freedom,  and  development.  The 
Philippines  would  belong  to  us  rather  than  become  part  of 
us.  We  should  govern  them  or  see  that  they  were  governed, 
and  if  we  discharge  our  duty  to  them  in  that  respect  as 
we  should,  it  will  be  to  their  incalculable  benefit.  The 
idea  that  we  cannot  under  our  system  acquire  or  possess 
any  country,  territory,  or  even  island  of  the  sea  unless  we 
intend  to  admit  our  acquisition  to  the  full  privilege  of 
statehood  has,  in  my  mind,  no  foundation  to  rest  upon.  If 
our  own  defence,  our  necessary  development,  or  real  in 
terest  requires  us  to  take  other  territory,  we  should  take  it 
and  then  proceed  to  govern  it  in  the  best  possible  way. 
Canada  and  Australia  are  instances  of  what  such  communi- 


294  Orville  H.  Platt 

ties  might  in  the  lapse  of  years  become  without  any  detri 
ment  to  our  system.  I  would  not  acquire  for  the  sake  of 
mere  acquisition  or  aggrandizement,  nor  would  I  on  the 
other  hand  refuse  to  do  what  duty  or  national  interest  may 
require. 

"New  occasions  teach  new  duties"  and  I  cannot  help 
the  conviction  that  the  United  States  is  called  by  Provi 
dence  to  a  great  work  for  mankind — that  each  ship  in  Manila 
Bay  was  a  new  Mayflower  steering  boldly  through  the 
winter  sea,  the  harbinger  and  agent  of  a  new  civilization  for 
lands  where  its  beneficent  influences  have  been  unfelt  and 
unknown. 

Pardon  my  enthusiasm.  I  am  so  full  of  the  idea  that 
I  cannot  write  or  look  upon  the  situation  tamely. 

The  unerring  logic  of  Senator  Platt 's  contention  was 
fully  justified  by  the  event.  When  the  peace  envoys 
came  to  consider,  on  the  ground  and  face  to  face  with 
real  conditions,  what  should  be  done  with  the  Philip 
pines  it  was  found,  as  the  wiser  statesmen  of  that  day 
had  foreseen,  that  there  could  be  no  sure  way  of  a  last 
ing  peace  except  through  an  agreement  that  the  United 
States  should  continue  to  hold  the  islands  where  Spain's 
sovereignty  had  been  dethroned. 

It  was  not  in  the  books,  however,  that  the  conclusions 
of  the  peace  commission  should  be  accepted  by  the 
Senate  without  question.  The  anti-imperialists  kept 
on  smiting  the  air  with  a  fury  which  was  in  inverse 
ratio  to  their  number  and  influence.  The  ablest  of 
their  number  in  the  Senate,  the  one  whose  utterances 
commanded  the  most  respect,  was  George  F.  Hoar  of 
Massachusetts.  Speaker  Reed  in  the  House  also  con 
tributed  the  influence  of  his  great  position  and  prestige, 
with  a  biting  wit  which  in  another  cause  might  have 
been  compelling.  It  was  a  source  of  grief  to  Senator 


Expansion  and  Imperialism  295 

Platt  that  on  this  question  which  he  regarded  as  vital 
he  should  be  obliged  to  take  issue  with  Senator  Hoar, 
long  esteemed  by  him  as  a  personal  friend  as  well  as 
one  of  the  ablest  and  purest  men  in  public  life.  But 
having  set  his  hand  to  the  plough  he  could  not  turn  back 
—considerations  of  friendship  must  yield  to  demands 
of  public  duty.  Various  resolutions  were  introduced 
by  Senators  who  believed  that  the  United  States  should 
not  retain  control  of  the  Philippines.  The  passage  of 
any  one  of  them  would  have  resulted  in  placing  the 
United  States  Government  in  a  false  position  in  the 
event  of  the  ratification  of  the  treaty  and  might  even 
have  evidenced  a  feeling  in  the  Senate  which  would 
have  caused  the  treaty's  defeat.  The  mere  discussion 
of  them  watered  the  seed  of  insurrection  in  Luzon.  For 
a  time  at  the  beginning  of  the  session  the  "Antis" 
seemed  to  be  having  things  their  own  way.  Senator 
Vest  of  Missouri  on  December  6th  introduced  the  fol 
lowing  resolution,  which  opened  up  an  opportunity  for 
debate : 

Resolved,  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives 
of  the  United  States  of  America  in  Congress  assembled, 
That  under  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  no  power 
is  given  to  the  Federal  Government  to  acquire  territory  to 
be  held  and  governed  permanently  as  colonies. 

The  colonial  system  of  European  nations  cannot  be 
established  under  our  present  Constitution,  but  all  territory 
acquired  by  the  Government,  except  such  small  amount 
as  may  be  necessary  for  coaling  stations,  correction  of 
boundaries,  and  similar  governmental  purposes,  must  be 
acquired  and  governed  with  the  purpose  of  ultimately 
organizing  such  territory  into  States  suitable  for  admission 
into  the  Union. 

Upon  this  declaration  the  anti-imperialists  took  their 


2g6  Orville  H.  Platt 

stand.  Vest ,  Hoar,  and  others  delivered  speeches  which 
were  undeniably  able  and  plausible.  It  remained  for 
Platt  to  voice  the  opinion  of  the  administration,  the 
majority  of  the  Senate,  and  of  the  overwhelming  ma 
jority  of  the  American  people.  On  December  igth, 
he  took  the  floor  to  present  an  argument  in  opposition 
to  the  Vest  resolution  which  was  to  serve  as  a  text-book 
for  all  who  came  after  him.  He  said  in  the  beginning : 

I  do  not  propose  to  discuss  the  so-called  policy  of  expan 
sion  nor  the  features  of  a  government  which  we  may 
authorize  or  establish  in  any  territory  which  we  may  ac 
quire.  I  will  simply  remark,  in  passing,  that  expansion  has 
been  the  law  of  our  national  growth;  more  than  that,  it  has 
been  the  great  law  of  our  racial  development,  and  the  United 
States  has  shown  a  capacity  for  government  in  all  trying 
times  and  under  all  trying  conditions,  and  has  shown  that 
it  is  equal  to  any  circumstances  which  may  arise.  ...  I 
propose  to  maintain  that  the  United  States  is  a  nation ;  that 
as  a  nation  it  possesses  every  sovereign  power  not  reserved 
in  its  Constitution  to  the  States  or  the  people;  that  the 
right  to  acquire  territory  was  not  reserved  and  is  there 
fore  an  inherent  sovereign  right;  that  it  is  a  right  upon 
which  there  is  no  limitation  and  in  regard  to  which  there 
is  no  qualification;  that  in  certain  instances  the  right 
may  be  inferred  from  specific  clauses  in  the  Constitution, 
but  that  it  exists  independent  of  these  clauses;  that  in 
the  right  to  acquire  territory  is  found  the  right  to  govern 
it,  and  as  the  right  to  govern  is  a  sovereign  right,  not  limited 
in  the  Constitution;  and  that  these  propositions  are  in  ac 
cordance  with  the  views  of  the  framers  of  the  Constitution, 
the  decisions  of  the  Supreme  Court,  and  the  legislation  of 
Congress. 

It  is  to  be  regretted  that  the  limitations  of  this  work 
forbid  the  reproduction  here  of  this  speech  in  its  en- 


Expansion  and  Imperialism  297 

tirety.  It  was  profound,  and  comprehensive,  packed 
with  citations  from  the  debates  on  the  Constitution, 
from  decisions  of  the  Supreme  Court,  and  from  the  ac 
tual  experience  of  the  United  States  in  the  acquisition 
and  control  of  territory.  Some  of  his  most  fruitful  sen 
tences  were  in  the  form  of  replies  to  questions  put  by 
Senators  on  the  opposing  side.  In  response  to  Allen 
of  Nebraska  he  declared: 

I  do  not  think  there  is  any  limitation  upon  our  power  to 
acquire  territory. 

And  again : 

I  do  not  believe  there  is  any  obligation  on  this  govern 
ment  to  give  to  people  who  may  inhabit  territory  which  we 
may  acquire  the  right  to  self-government  until  such  time 
as  we  think  they  are  fit  to  exercise  it ;  and  that  is  the  doctrine 
we  have  always  maintained  in  dealing  with  the  territory 
acquired. 

He  expressed  his  agreement  with  Daniel  Webster 
that  Congress : 

may  establish  any  such  government  and  any  such  laws 
in  the  territories  as  in  its  discretion  it  may  see  fit.  It  is 
subject  of  course  to  the  rules  of  justice  and  propriety  but 
it  is  under  no  constitutional  restraints. 

But  the  sentence  by  which  this  speech  will  be  longest 
remembered — a  sentence  that  filled  the  souls  of  the 
"  Antis  "  with  rage  and  for  a  time  concentrated  upon  its 
author  the  venom  of  their  attacks — was  in  reply  to  a 
question  put  by  Mr.  Hoar.  Consumed  as  he  thought 
with  the  fire  of  patriotism,  Hoar  had  listened  with 
ill-concealed  impatience  through  the  greater  part  of 
Platt's  speech  and  then  he  arose.  This  colloquy 
followed : 


298  Orville  H.  Platt 

MR.  HOAR:  May  I  ask  the  Senator  from  Connecticut  one 
question  at  this  point? 

MR.  PLATT:   Certainly. 

MR.  HOAR:  It  is  whether,  in  his  opinion,  governments 
derive  their  just  powers  from  the  consent  of  the  governed? 

The  trembling  voice  with  which  the  aged  Massachu 
setts  Senator  put  this  question  betrayed  the  tenseness 
of  his  feeling.  It  was  the  conclusive,  damning  appeal 
to  the  Declaration  of  Independence  which  was  so 
conspicuous  a  feature  of  the  anti-imperialist  propa 
ganda,  and  when  Senator  Platt  replied  with  quiet 
emphasis,  "  From  the  consent  of  some  of  the  governed," 
there  was  a  gasp  of  dismay.  Then  Senator  Platt  went 
on  to  explain :  "  The  State  of  Massachusetts  governs 
people  who  cannot  read  and  write,  and  it  governs  them 
pretty  effectually  too.  If  they  commit  any  crime,  it 
punishes  them,  but  it  does  not  allow  them  to  vote."  He 
did  not  deny  the  principles  of  the  Declaration  of  Inde 
pendence  but  pointed  out  that  all  sorts  of  qualifica 
tions  for  voting  had  been  adopted  in  the  United  States : 

There  are  250,000  American  citizens  within  five  miles 
of  the  spot  where  I  stand.  They  are  governed  by  Congress. 
Not  one  of  them  can  vote.  His  consent  is  not  asked.  The 
government  in  the  District  of  Columbia  certainly  does  not 
depend  upon  the  consent  of  the  governed.  Does  the  Senator 
from  Massachusetts  hold  that  this  provision  for  governing 
the  District  of  Columbia,  exercised  under  that  clause  of  the 
Constitution  which  says  that  Congress  shall  have  exclusive 
jurisdiction  of  ten  miles  square  in  the  District  of  Columbia, 
is  a  violation  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Declaration  of  Indepen 
dence,  that  all  governments  derive  their  just  powers  from 
the  consent  of  the  governed?  Does  he  hold  that  that  is  a 
violation  of  the  principle  for  which  we  contended  when 
we  revolted  and  severed  our  connection  with  Great  Britain, 


Expansion  and  Imperialism  299 

because  there  was  taxation  without  representation?  Oh, 
no,  Mr.  President.  In  his  fear  and  doubt  the  Senator  from 
Massachusetts  sees  lions  in  the  path  that  are  not  there ;  if  we 
go  straight  forward,  though  it  may  be  the  Hill  of  Difficulty, 
we  shall  find  that  the  lions  at  least  are  chained,  and  we  shall 
arrive  at  the  House  Beautiful. 

In  conclusion,  I  cannot  understand  either  the  sentiment 
or  the  motive  of  those  who  are  unwilling  to  concede  that  our 
Government  is  a  nation,  and  who  fear  to  see  it  clothed  with 
every  element  of  sovereignty  which  a  nation  should  possess 
and  does  possess. 

Why  should  any  man,  why,  especially,  should  any  Sena 
tor,  wish  to  detract  from,  to  diminish  or  belittle  the  power 
of  his  government  ?  Why  strive  by  subtle,  metaphysical,  and 
logic-chopping  arguments  to  hamper  its  operations  and 
circumscribe  its  province?  Rather  should  we  in  our 
national  love  rejoice  to  see  it  invested  with  strength. 
Rather  should  we  bid  it  Godspeed  in  its  mission  to  relieve 
the  oppressed,  to  right  every  wrong,  and  to  extend  the 
institutions  of  free  government.  For  this  is  the  people's 
government;  the  government  of  a  great  people,  a  liberty- 
loving  people,  a  people  that  can  be  trusted  to  do  right  and 
to  guarantee  to  all  men  who  shall  come  under  its  beneficent 
sway  and  be  subject  to  its  jurisdiction  the  largest  measure 
of  liberty  consistent  with  good  order  and  their  general 
well-being. 

Rather  let  us  have  faith  in  the  Government,  faith  in  its 
future.  Stilled  be  the  voice  of  timidity  and  distrust, 
stilled  be  the  utterance  of  captious  and  carping  criticism. 
Let  us  have  faith  that  the  powers  of  Government  will  never 
be  unrighteously  exercised.  Like  Lincoln,  when  he  met 
the  contention  that  the  Government  had  no  power  adequate 
to  its  self-preservation,  let  us  turn  from  disputatious 
subtleties  and  "have  faith  that  right  makes  might,  and  in 
that  faith  dare  to  do  our  duty  as  we  understand  it."  In 
that  faith  the  mountains  of  doubt  will  be  removed  and  the 
way  of  duty  become  straight  and  plain. 


300  Orville  H.  Platt 

Little  more  than  a  century  has  passed  since  from  the 
tower  of  Independence  Hall  in  Philadelphia,  when  we  sev 
ered  our  connection  with  Great  Britain,  the  Liberty  Bell 
rang  out  the  message,  "Proclaim  liberty  throughout  the 
land  and  to  all  the  inhabitants  thereof. "  We  were  small 
and  weak  then.  Timid  doubters  said  there  was  a  lion  in  the 
path,  but  the  spirit  of  the  Constitution  was  in  that  message. 
With  that  Constitution  came  nationality  and  sovereignty. 
Under  that  Constitution,  in  the  name  and  by  the  power  of 
the  nation,  liberty  has  been  proclaimed  to  regions  never 
dreamed  of  by  the  fathers.  Is  it  for  us  now,  when  we  have 
become  great  and  strong,  though  timid  doubters  still  say 
there  are  lions  in  the  path,  to  declare  that  neither  in  the 
spirit  of  the  Constitution  nor  by  the  exercise  of  national 
sovereignty  can  we  proclaim  liberty  a  rood  or  a  foot  beyond 
our  present  territorial  limits?  Oh!  for  the  faith  and  the 
courage  of  the  fathers! 

From  that  day  less  and  less  was  heard  in  the  long 
drawn  out  discussion  about  the  Declaration  of  Inde 
pendence  and  "  the  consent  of  the  governed."  Senator 
Platt  had  effectually  punctured  the  bubble  of  that 
particular  argument  against  the  acquisition  of  the 
Philippines. 1 

i  On  October  n,  1899,  Mr.  Platt  delivered  an  address  on  "Ex 
pansion"  before  the  Union  League  Club  of  Brooklyn,  from  which 
the  following  excerpts  are  taken: 

"Very  strange  as  it  seems  to  me,  there  are  some  persons  who 
think  we  ought  to  abandon  or  surrender  our  new  possessions,  but 
there  is  nothing  in  the  history  of  our  development  to  justify  the 
expectation  that  when  the  United  States  has  once  acquired  terri 
tory,  it  will  ever  give  it  away,  barter,  or  sell  it,  or  surrender  it  to 
armed  force.  There  can  be  no  distinction  drawn  between  Porto 
Rico,  the  Philippines,  or  the  smaller  islands  in  this  respect.  Rather 
does  our  whole  history  show  that  with  every  acquisition  of  territory 
we  have  fully  recognized  our  obligation  to  provide  good  government 
therein,  government  by  which  the  rights  of  the  people  are  respected 
and  their  best  interests  promoted.  We  have  never  plundered  or 
misgoverned  .new  territory  and  we  never  shall.  We  have  never 


Expansion  and  Imperialism  301 

oppressed  the  people  in  new  territory,  nor  shall  we  do  so  now.  To 
allege  that  we  irtend  to  misgovern  or  oppress  in  our  new  possessions 
is  to  slander  our  Government,  and  I  can  think  of  no  more  atrocious 
slander  than  that.  All  this  newly  acquired  territory  belongs  to 
the  United  States,  and  we  are  going  to  keep  it,  provide  for  it  with 
the  best  possible  government,  and  immeasurably  benefit  its  people. 
It  has  been  acquired  by  conquest  and  treaty.  The  treaty  which 
confirmed  the  conquest  is  the  supreme  law  of  the  land,  and  the 
performance  of  every  obligation  specified  or  involved  in  that  treaty 
is  as  truly  a  national  duty  as  the  execution  of  any  law  upon 
our  statute  books.  ...  I  really  have  not  discovered  the  anti- 
imperialist  who  urges  constitutional  objections  respecting  the  ac 
quisition  of  Porto  Rico  or  feels  that  the  Declaration  of  Independence 
was  violated  when  Spain  ceded  it  to  us  and  we  accepted  it  as  the 
result  of  the  war.  Democratic  platform  makers  would,  like  the 
ancient  Augurs,  be  laughing  in  each  others'  faces  if  a  plank  in  their 
platform  should  denounce  the  acquisition  of  Porto  Rico  alone. 
Not  a  soul  of  them  would  listen  to  a  proposition  to  give  away,  sell, 
barter,  or  surrender  that  island.  So  I  say  that  I  find  great  diffi 
culty  in  speaking  of  the  Philippines  as  disconnected  from  Porto 
Rico.  Our  right  is  the  same  to  each,  our  title  as  perfect  to  one  as 
the  other,  the  difficulties  of  administration  as  great  in  one  case  as  the 
other,  and  the  fact  that  our  people  as  a  whole  are  satisfied  with  the 
acquisition  of  Porto  Rico  shows  that  no  one  really  believes  there  is 
anything  in  the  Declaration  of  Independence  or  the  Constitution 
of  the  United  States,  or  the  principles  upon  which  our  Government 
is  founded,  which  made  our  acquisition  of  the  Philippines  improper 
•or  forbids  our  retention  of  them.  All  of  this  talk  about  the  consent 
of  the  governed,  Filipino  independence,  the  wickedness  of  sub 
jugation,  and  the  denial  of  constitutional  rights  to  the  people  there, 
is  simply  a  false  issue.  The  thing  which  really  troubles  the  few 
anti-imperialists  is  that  they  fear  the  United  States  has  made  a 
bad  bargain.  .  .  .  All  the  consequences  of  war  must  be  accepted 
by  the  nation  that  engages  in  war,  and  the  unavoidable  conse 
quence  of  our  triumph  in  Manila  Bay  was  that  we  should  assume 
control  of  the  Philippine  Islands;  that  a  duty  arose  when  the 
Spanish  ships  went  down.  Neither  man  nor  nation  can  avoid 
duty  and  achieve  just  success.  It  is  the  glory  of  our  nation  that 
it  has  always  met  and  performed  national  duty.  If  the  war  with 
Spain  was,  as  we  believed  and  avowed,  a  war  for  humanity,  our 
obligation  to  Spanish  subjects  in  the  Philippines  was  just  as  great 
as  to  Spanish  subjects  in  Cuba.  If  we  were  liberators  in  Cuba,  we 
were  equally  so  in  the  Philippines.  The  assumption  of  control 
in  the  Philippine  Islands  was  a  duty  which  we  owed  to  the  nations 


302  Orville  H.  Platt 

of  the  world,  to  ourselves,  to  the  inhabitants  of  those  islands,  and 
to  mankind.  It  would  have  been  criminal  neglect  to  have  aban 
doned  the  Filipinos  either  to  Spain  or  a  Malay  dictator.  We 
emerged  from  our  war  with  honor.  We  should  have  been  dis 
honored  if  we  had  shirked  the  obligations  which  that  war  imposed 
upon  us.  ... 

"Expansion  has  marked  every  step  of  our  national  growth  and 
progress.  Every  expansion  of  our  territory  has  been  in  accordance 
with  the  irresistible  law  of  growth.  We  could  no  more  resist  the 
successive  expansions  by  which  we  have  grown  to  be  the  strongest 
nation  on  earth,  than  a  tree  can  resist  its  natural  growth.  The 
history  of  territorial  expansion  is  the  history  of  our  nation's  progress 
and  glory.  It  is  a  matter  to  be  proud  of,  not  to  lament.  We 
should  rejoice  that  Providence  has  given  us  the  opportunity  to 
extend  our  influence,  our  institutions,  and  our  civilization  into  re 
gions  hitherto  closed  to  us  rather  than  contrive  how  we  can  thwart 
its  designs.  When  Admiral  Dewey  was  asked  how  he  accounted 
for  the  fact  that  so  little  damage  was  done  by  the  Spanish  guns 
at  Manila  he  is  said  to  have  replied:  'If  I  were  a  religious  man,  and 
I  hope  I  am,  I  should  say  that  the  hand  of  God  was  in  it. '  Your 
own  Dr.  Dix  said  the  other  day  in  his  pulpit  that  he  felt  '  that  some 
unseen  and  mysterious  power  had  been,  and  is,  at  work  conduct 
ing  and  compelling  a  certain  end,  to  be  accomplished  by  peaceful 
methods  if  possible,  but  if  not  peacefully  then  by  the  whole  force 
of  the  powers  of  the  State. '  I  believe  with  Admiral  Dewey  and 
Dr.  Dix,  that  the  United  States  has  found  in  its  Philippine  problem 
the  greatest  opportunity  for  the  extension  of  freedom  and  beneficent 
government  which  it  has  ever  enjoyed." 


CHAPTER  XXIII 

NATIONAL  DUTY 

Debate  with  Senator  Hoar,  February  n,  1902 — The  Destiny 
of  the  Republic — Favors  a  Colonial  System. 

ONCE  more  Platt  and  Hoar  came  together  on  this 
question  of  the  Philippines.  It  was  during  the 
long  continued  debate  on  the  Philippine  tariff  in 
the  session  of  1901-2,  when  the  entire  question  of 
the  retention  of  the  archipelago  was  lugged  into  the 
discussion.  Aguinaldo  was  in  captivity,  and  the  guerilla 
bands  who  had  been  resisting  American  authority  in  the 
islands  were  rapidly  disappearing  so  that  American 
military  forces,  no  longer  needed  to  preserve  order, 
were  gradually  withdrawing  and  the  islands  were 
approaching  a  condition  of  permanent  peace.  But  the 
anti-imperialist  propaganda  in  the  United  States  was 
still  busy,  and  it  had  its  chief  encouragement  from  the 
little  band  of  irreconcilables  in  the  Senate  at  Washing 
ton.  On  February  nth,  Senator  Teller  had  occupied 
almost  the  entire  day  in  a  violent  assault  upon  the 
Government's  Philippine  policy.  Toward  the  close  of 
the  afternoon  he  rested  and  Mr.  Platt  took  the  floor 
to  reply  to  certain  criticisms  of  the  character  of  our 
officials,  lauding  the  work  of  the  Philippine  Commission, 
and  dwelling  upon  the  rapid  progress  of  the  pacification 
of  the  islands: 

303 


304  Orville  H.  Platt 

I  think  [he  said]  if  we  take  facts  and  not  fancies,  if 
we  take  things  as  they  really  are,  and  not  as  they  are  con 
jured  up  by  the  party  of  protest  and  disapproval,  we  shall 
see  that  we  are  getting  along  very  well  in  the  Philippine 
Islands,  and  are  progressing  very  rapidly  toward  a  condition 
there,  in  which  the  Filipinos  themselves  will  have  a  very 
large  share  of  participation,  which  will  be  entirely  satis 
factory  to  them  and  which  they  will  welcome  as  a  blessing 
to  themselves  and  the  archipelago. 

This  incident  would  have  ended  there  had  not 
Senator  Hoar  undertaken  to  reply,  disputing  Platt 's 
assertions,  questioning  the  genuineness  of  the  elections 
which  had  been  held  in  the  provinces,  and  belittling  the 
quality  of  the  free  schools  established  by  American 
authority.  "  I  hope,"  he  concluded,  "  the  rosy  view  of 
my  friend,  the  Senator  from  Connecticut,  will  turn  out 
to  be  all  right,  but  I  confess  I  am  afraid  he  will  have 
to  try  again." 

The  manner  of  the  attack  stirred  Platt  to  a  response 
which  the  newspapers  of  the  day  describe  as  a  "  revival 
of  the  best  traditions  of  the  Senate."  He  regretted  the 
sneers  at  the  efforts  to  educate  the  children  of  the 
Philippine  Islands,  and  then  he  took  up  the  question 
of  treason  against  the  United  States.  He  read  from  the 
statutes  of  Connecticut  the  law  which  relates  to  treason 
and  misprision  of  treason  and  proceeded  to  apply  it : 

As  I  understand  that  statute,  Mr.  President,  there  are 
certain  persons  living  in  the  State  of  the  Senator  from 
Massachusetts  who,  if  they  had  come  into  the  State  of 
Connecticut  and  commenced  to  carry  on  intercourse  with 
the  Filipinos  with  intent  to  aid  them  or  to  defeat  or  em 
barrass  the  measures  of  the  Government  of  the  State  or 
of  the  United  States,  would  have  subjected  themselves  to 
the  penalty  of  this  statute;  and  yet  the  people  of  Con- 


National  Duty  305 

necticut  have  not  been  chafing  under  it.  The  people  of 
Connecticut  think  that  is  right,  and  that  a  man  who,  when 
there  is  a  rebellion  against  the  State  or  the  United  States, 
enters  into  communication  with  the  enemy  for  the  purpose  of 
embarrassing  the  operations  of  the  State  or  United  States, 
commits  a  crime,  and  subjects  himself  to  punishment. 

If  we  are  a  Government  worthy  of  the  name,  worthy  of 
living,  worthy  of  a  place  in  the  present  or  the  future  [he 
exclaimed  with  fervor],  wherever  men  take  arms  against 
the  Government  of  the  United  States  in  any  country, 
district,  or  territory  where  the  sovereignty  of  the  United 
States  prevails,  we  will  put  down  that  rebellion.  .  .  . 
No  perversion  of  the  doctrine  of  independence  and  no 
perversion  of  the  glory  of  liberty  is  going  to  convince 
this  American  people  that  it  is  not  only  its  right  but  its 
duty  to  itself  to  put  down  armed  resistance  against  the 
Government  wherever  it  may  rear  its  hateful  head. 

He  compared  the  situation  in  the  Philippines  with  the 
attitude  of  the  South  at  the  close  of  the  Civil  War : 

I  do  not  want  to  say  anything  to  revive  the  memories  of 
the  saddest  war  of  recent  times,  but  I  cannot  refrain  from 
alluding  to  the  fact  that  for  four  long  years  we  resisted  this 
doctrine  that  government  in  its  strict  and  literal  sense  de 
pended  upon  the  consent  of  the  governed,  and  that  eleven 
States  and  the  people  of  those  States,  claiming  that  they 
could  not  be  coerced,  claiming  that  they  were  struggling  for 
liberty  and  establishing  an  independence  of  their  own,  for 
four  long  years  fought  that  question  out  with  us,  and  we 
prevailed. 

And  now,  if  I  understand,  we  have  done  the  same  thing 
in  the  Philippines.  Some  people  over  there,  a  few  only 
compared  with  the  great  mass  of  people,  followed  the  for 
tunes  of  one  Aguinaldo.  Did  he  have  any  consent  of  the 
governed  upon  which  to  rely  ?  If  the  doctrine  of  the  consent 
of  the  governed  must  be  strictly  enforced  here,  I  inquire 
what  consent  of  the  governed  this  vaunted  and  eulogized 


306  Orville  H.  Platt 

Aguinaldo  had  in  the  Philippine  Islands?  What  right  had 
he,  any  more  than  we,  to  demand  the  right  to  govern 
those  islands? 

In  all  the  range  of  his  public  speech  there  is  no  finer 
bit  of  exalted  eloquence  than  the  words  with  which  he 
brought  this  unpremeditated  utterance  to  a  close: 

Talk  about  commercialism!  Is  this  matter  to  be 
weighed  by  bookkeeping  to  see  where  the  balance  of  ad 
vantage  is  in  dollars  and  cents  ?  I  think  the  United  States 
of  America  has  a  high  call  to  duty,  to  a  moral  duty,  to 
duty  to  advance  the  cause  of  free  government  in  the  world 
by  something  more  than  example.  It  is  not  enough  to 
say  to  a  country  over  which  we  have  acquired  an  undisputed 
and  indisputable  sovereignty:  "Go  your  own  gait;  look  at 
our  example.  In  the  entrance  of  the  harbor  of  New  York, 
our  principal  port,  there  is  the  statue  of  Liberty  Enlight 
ening  the  World.  Look  at  that,  and  follow  our  example." 

No,  Mr.  President.  When  the  Anglo-Saxon  race  crossed 
the  Atlantic  and  stood  on  the  shores  of  Massachusetts 
Bay  and  on  Plymouth  Rock  that  movement  meant  some 
thing  more  than  the  establishment  of  religious  and  civil 
liberty  within  a  narrow,  confined,  and  limited  compass.  It 
had  in  it  the  force  of  the  Almighty;  and  from  that  day  to 
this  it  has  been  spreading,  widening,  and  extending  until, 
like  the  stone  seen  by  Daniel  in  his  vision  cut  out  of  the 
mountain  without  hands,  it  has  filled  all  our  borders,  and 
ever  westward  across  the  Pacific  that  influence  which  found 
its  home  in  the  Mayflower  and  its  development  on  Plymouth 
Rock  has  been  extending  and  is  extending  its  sway  and  its 
beneficence. 

I  believe,  Mr.  President,  that  the  time  is  coming,  as  surely 
coming  as  the  time  when  the  world  shall  be  Christianized, 
when  the  world  shall  be  converted  to  the  cause  of  free 
government,  and  I  believe  the  United  States  is  a  provi 
dentially  appointed  agent  for  that  purpose.  The  day  may  be 


National  Duty  307 

long  in  coming  and  it  may  be  in  the  far  future,  but  he  who 
has  studied  the  history  of  this  western  world  from  the  twenty- 
second  day  of  December,  1620^0  the  present  hour  must  be 
blind  indeed  if  he  cannot  see  thaf  the  cause  of  free  govern 
ment  in  the  world  is  still  progressing  and  that  what  the 
United  States  is  doing  in  the  Philippine  Islands  is  in  the 
extension  of  that  beneficent  purpose. 

He  had  inflicted  wounds  which  were  never  to  be 
healed.  As  he  took  his  seat  after  delivering  his  fervid 
peroration,  Senator  Hoar  came  over  and  sat  beside  him. 
"Mr.  Platt,"  he  said  in  a  broken  voice,  "I  fully  ex 
pected  that  somebody  would  say  all  this;  but  I  did  n't 
think  that  you  would  be  the  one."  From  that  hour 
the  personal  relations  between  the  two  great  Senators 
were  never  quite  as  they  had  been  before,  although 
toward  the  end  there  was  a  restoration  of  kindly  feel 
ing,  and  Platb's  tribute  to  Hoar  on  the  occasion  of  the 
eulogies  of  the  latter  in  the  Senate  a  few  years  later  was 
one  of  the  most  beautiful  and  appropriate  then  spoken. 

Believing  as  he  did  in  the  constitutional  power  of 
this  Government  to  acquire  territory  when  and  where 
it  might  see  fit,  Mr.  Platt  at  the  same  time  held  clearly 
defined  opinions  as  to  the  manner  in  which  such 
territory  should  be  governed.  He  was  unalterably 
opposed  to  any  proposition  looking  to  the  annexation 
of  non-contiguous  territory  with  any  understanding 
that  it  was  ever  to  become  an  integral  part  of  the 
United  States,  entitled  to  the  privilege  of  statehood. 
This  question  first  arose  acutely  in  his  mind  with 
reference  to  Hawaii,  after  the  passage  of  the  resolution 
of  annexation  in  the  summer  of  1898.  We  were  in  the 
midst  of  the  war  with  Spain  when  our  future  course 
with  regard  to  conquered  territory  was  still  unsettled, 
and  he  felt  that  in  Hawaii  we  should  proceed  with 


308  Orville  H.  Platt 

caution  as  establishing  a  possible  precedent  for  more 
serious  questions  later  to  arise. 

He  was  in  consultation  with  President  McKinley  on 
this  subject  and  on  July  pth,  after  a  call  at  the  White 
House,  he  wrote  to  the  President,  as  follows: 

Since  seeing  you  this  morning  I  have  thought  much  of 
the  work  of  the  commission  to  prepare  a  code  of  laws  for 
Hawaii.  I  trust  that  in  preparing  this  code  of  laws  nothing 
will  be  done  or  agreed  upon  which  will  in  any  way  commit 
the  United  States  to  the  project  of  their  making  a  state  of 
the  Hawaiian  Islands,  or  incorporating  them  with  an  exist 
ing  State.  It  seems  to  me  that  we  must  now  mark  out  our 
policy  for  all  our  future  as  to  territory  which  we  may  conquer 
or  be  obliged  to  take,  and  that  it  should  be  understood  that 
statehood  is  out  of  the  question. 

We  have  Alaska  now,  we  have  Hawaii,  we  may  have 
possessions  that  we  conquer  from  Spain.  We  may  be 
obliged  either  for  self-defence  or  for  our  own  development,  to 
acquire  territory  elsewhere,  as  for  instance  along  the  route 
of  the  Nicaragua  Canal  if  we  ever  build  it.  We  shall  need 
coaling  stations,  and  there  are  various  emergencies  in 
which  a  nation  like  ours  may  be  compelled  to  acquire  ter 
ritory.  In  saying  this  I  am  far  from  being  what  is  called 
an  "expansionist,"  but  I  recognize  the  fact  that  we  can 
no  longer  shut  ourselves  up  within  our  present  limits. 

Our  history  and  tradition  have  begotten  the  idea  in  the 
public  mind  that  we  cannot  have  colonies  or  dependencies 
except  we  incorporate  them  into  our  system  as  states. 
This  will  never  do,  and  we  must  educate  our  people  to  under 
stand  when  we  acquire  possessions  outside  of  our  integral  ter 
ritory  that  we  have  the  right  and  the  power,  and  that  it  is 
our  duty  to  see  that  the  best  possible  government  is  provided 
for  such  possessions,  but  that  they  have  no  claim  to  become 
states.  Contrary  to  the  general  belief,  svch  was  the  view 
of  the  wisest  men  who  framed  the  Constitution.  I  merely 


National  Duty  309 

speak  of  this  now  from  an  indefinite  fear  that  our  commission 
to  prepare  a  code  of  laws  may  in  some  way  encourage  the 
idea  that  the  Hawaiian  Islands  may  in  some  remote  future 
become  a  state  or  a  part  of  a  state,  in  our  Government. 

I  think  they  ought  to  be  very  careful  in  this  respect, 
and  I  hope  that  in  talking  with  them  you  will  impress  this 
view  upon  them.  President  Dole  and  Chief-Justice  Judd 
are  very  astute  men.  I  have  a  little  fear  that  Senator 
Morgan  may  think  that  they  have  the  right  to  territorial 
government  which  we  have  always  said  was  a  pledge  of 
statehood.  I  think  we  may  well  follow  the  policy  of 
England,  adapting  the  government  of  her  colonies  or 
dependencies  to  the  capacity  of  the  people.  England  has 
every  kind  of  a  government  for  her  colonies  from  what  is 
called  the  " Crown"  government  to  the  liberal  governments 
of  Canada  and  Australia,  which  are  practically  republics 
with  a  nominal  subjection  to  the  mother  country. 

Our  duty  and  our  only  duty  is  to  see  that  the  best  govern 
ment  for  which  the  people  have  capacity  is  provided  for 
Hawaii  and  any  other  dependencies  which  may  become 
ours.  In  other  words,  the  United  States  should  see  to  it 
that  they  have  good  government  and  should  stop  there.  If 
we  for  a  moment  tolerate  the  idea  of  present  or  future 
statehood,  we  shall  have  infinite  trouble. 

Will  you  pardon  this  brief  expression  of  my  views? 
I  think  the  question  of  what  kind  of  a  government  shall  be 
provided  for  Hawaii  may  be  left  to  the  future.  It  is  not 
necessary  to  determine  it  fully  now.  The  laws  of  Hawaii 
are  to  remain  in  force  until  Congress  adopts  new  ones,  and 
there  need  be  no  haste  about  planning  and  putting  into 
operation  a  specific  form  of  government  there.  We  ought 
not  to  even  use  the  word  "territory"  in  connection  with  the 
Hawaiian  Islands. 

A  similar  question  arose  five  years  later  when  the 
proposal  was  made  to  organize  the  Territory  of  Alaska. 
In  the  course  of  a  letter  which  he  wrote  on  June  1 1 , 1 903 , 


310  Orville  H.  Platt 

to  Senator  Dillingham  of  Vermont,  Mr.  Platt  declared 
his  position  again,  without  equivocation : 

I  am  very  decidedly  of  the  opinion  that  our  policy  should 
be,  and  should  be  declared  to  be,  that  we  do  not  propose 
to  admit  states  from  outside  of  what  may  be  called  our 
home  territory.  I  felt  it  when  we  adopted  a  form  of 
government  for  the  Sandwich  Islands,  Porto  Rico,  and  the 
Philippines,  but  I  thought  the  time  was  not  ripe  then  to 
say  just  what  I  thought  about  it.  My  idea  is  that  as  to 
those  outside  possessions,  we  should  retain  over  them  the 
complete  right  of  government  as  might  appear  to  be  for 
our  own  and  their  best  interests,  without  any  promise  or 
intimation  of  future  statehood.  It  makes  no  difference 
by  what  name  such  a  government  is  to  be  called,  whether 
colonial  or  independent  or  despotic.  I  do  not  believe  we 
can  afford  to  let  in  states  from  outside  our  older  territory — 
in  other  words,  I  believe  that  the  United  States  should  be 
bounded  on  the  east  by  the  Atlantic  Ocean,  on  the  north 
by  the  British  possessions,  on  the  west  by  the  Pacific  Ocean, 
and  on  the  south  by  the  Gulf  and  by  Mexico ;  that  whatever 
territory  comes  in  outside  of  that  should  be  governed  by  us, 
and  not  by  the  people  therein  in  the  capacity  of  states 
admitted  upon  equal  footing  with  the  present  States. 

I  told  Senator  Beveridge  that  if  he  brought  in  a  bill  for 
the  organization  of  the  Territory  of  Alaska,  and  the  ap 
pointment  of  a  delegate,  I  should  have  to  oppose  it,  or  at 
least  propose  an  amendment,  which  should  declare  the 
policy  of  the  United  States  to  be  against  its  future 
admission  as  a  state. 


CHAPTER  XXIV 

ON  GUARD  OVER  CUBA 

New  Problems — Chairman  of  Committee  on  Cuban  Relations — 
Opposed  to  Annexation — The  Question  of  Sovereignty — 
Visit  to  Cuba,  1900 — The  Cuban  Scandal — Extra  Allow 
ances. 

WITH  peace  formally  a  fact,  through  the  ratifica 
tion  of  the  Treaty  of  Paris,  with  American 
supremacy  established  permanently  in  Hawaii,  Porto 
Rico,  and  the  Philippines,  with  United  States  troops 
occupying  the  newly  liberated  island  of  Cuba,  the 
American  Congress  was  confronted  by  unaccustomed 
problems.  It  was  fortunate  that  the  men  who  then 
controlled  the  affairs  of  state  were  such  as  they  were. 
In  every  crisis  of  American  history  it  had  happened 
hitherto  that  leaders  fit  to  cope  with  it  had  been  ready 
at  hand,  and  the  pregnant  time  following  the  war  with 
Spain  found  its  own  leaders  in  the  men  already  shaping 
the  deliberations  of  Cabinet  and  Congress.  McKinley 
was  in  the  White  House,  broadened  and  strengthened 
by  the  stress  of  war;  Hay  was  at  the  State  Department, 
a  consummate  diplomat,  fitted  by  aptitude  and  training 
skilfully  to  influence  the  councils  of  the  Powers;  Root 
was  Secretary  of  War,  a  great  lawyer,  a  great  adminis 
trator,  equipped  with  a  talent  for  lucid,  cogent  state 
ment  invaluable  in  the  enunciation  of  new  policies. 
Taft  was  in  the  Philippines,  Wood  in  Cuba,  Allen  in 
Porto  Rico.  The  administration  of  the  United  States 

311 


312  Orville  H.  Platt 

and  its  dependencies  could  not  have  been  in  safer 
hands. 

In  the  Senate  was  a  group  of  men  worthy  of  the  best 
days  of  the  Republic :  Hale  and  Frye  of  Maine,  Chandler 
and  Gallinger  of  New  Hampshire,  Proctor  and  Ross 
of  Vermont,  Aldrich  of  Rhode  Island,  Platt  and 
Hawley  of  Connecticut,  Hoar  and  Lodge  of  Massa 
chusetts,  Hanna  and  Foraker  of  Ohio,  Beveridge  and 
Fairbanks  of  Indiana,  Cullom  of  Illinois,  Spooner  of 
Wisconsin,  Davis  and  Nelson  of  Minnesota,  Burrows  and 
McMillan  of  Michigan,  Allison  and  Gear  of  Iowa,  Carter 
of  Montana,  Warren  and  Clark  of  Wyoming,  Teller  and 
Wolcott  of  Colorado,  Morgan  and  Pettus  of  Alabama, 
Cockrell  and  Vest  of  Missouri.  There  were  marked 
differences  of  opinion  among  these  men,  but  a  unity  of 
purpose,  in  that  thought  of  personal  or  party  advantage 
played  a  minor  part  in  their  deliberations  on  the  state 
of  the  Union.  When  the  Fifty-sixth  Congress  came 
together,  on  December  4,  1899,  special  care  was  taken 
in  the  constitution  of  the  new  committees  of  the  Senate 
entrusted  with  the  consideration  of  legislation  relating 
to  our  new  possessions  and  dependencies. 

Mr.  Lodge  was  made  Chairman  of  the  Committee  on 
the  Philippines,  Mr.  Foraker  on  Pacific  Islands  and 
Porto  Rico,  Mr.  Platt  on  Relations  with  Cuba.  With 
these  chairmen  were  grouped  the  ablest  men  in  the 
Senate.  Senator  Platt 's  committee  was  peculiarly 
notable  in  its  personnel.  Associated  with  him  in  the 
work  which  it  was  recognized  would  be  probably  the 
most  delicate  and  important  of  Congress  were  Aldrich, 
Cullom,  Davis,  McMillan,  Chandler,  Spooner,  Teller, 
Money,  Butler,  and  Taliaferro,  the  last  four  being 
representatives  of  the  Democratic  and  Populist 
minority.  It  was  as  Chairman  of  this  Committee, 


On  Guard  over  Cuba  313 

thus  scrupulously  chosen,  that  he  was  to  perform  the 
work  which  if  not  the  most  important  of  his  career  was 
at  least  the  most  notable — the  work  which  in  the 
closing  years  of  a  useful  life  won  him  the  national 
popular  recognition  which  his  unassuming  worth  had 
not  hitherto  demanded. 

It  was  not  his  own  wish  to  be  Chairman  of  the  Cuban 
Committee.  If  he  could  have  chosen  for  himself  he 
would  have  been  placed  at  the  head  of  the  Committee 
on  the  Philippines.  That  was  an  assignment  upon 
which  he  would  have  entered  in  a  spirit  of  religious 
exaltation;  for  he  was  deeply  rooted  in  the  faith  that 
in  the  acquisition  of  the  Philippines  his  country  had 
crossed  the  threshold  of  a  new  and  greater  future.  In 
the  original  distribution  of  the  chairmanships,  he 
understood  that  the  Philippines  would  be  assigned  to 
him,  and  it  was  perhaps  the  keenest  disappointment 
of  his  political  life  when  the  Senate  leaders  determined 
that  he  could  render  better  service  as  Chairman  of  the 
Cuban  Committee.  The  assignment  was  distasteful 
to  him.  Prior  to  the  war  with  Spain  he  was  not  one 
of  those  who  cried  unceasingly  that  the  Cuban  people 
should  be  sustained  in  their  struggle  for  liberty.  He 
acquiesced  in  our  intervention  not  from  any  love  of 
Cuba  but  solely  as  a  duty  which  his  own  people  owed  to 
themselves  and  to  mankind;  and  now  he  was  called 
to  the  thankless  task  of  administering  the  trust  which 
that  intervention  had  imposed  upon  us.  He  entered 
on  the  work  with  the  modesty  and  conscientiousness 
which  never  failed  him.  There  were  serious  problems 
with  regard  to  Cuba  at  the  best,  and  they  were  shortly 
to  be  complicated  by  the  revelations  of  dishonesty 
among  our  public  officials  there  which  came  to  light  a 
few  months  after  the  organization  of  the  new  committee 


314  Orville  H.  Platt 

— revelations  involving  an  insignificant  number  of 
American  office-holders  in  the  island,  but  far-reaching 
in  their  moral  effect. 

Most  important  of  the  questions  concerning  Cuba 
was  that  of  the  length  of  American  occupation.  Hav 
ing  taken  the  government  of  the  island  in  trust,  how 
long  should  we  continue  to  hold  it,  and  what  if  ever 
should  be  the  manner  of  evacuation.  Probably  a 
great  majority  of  the  American  people,  as  well  as  of 
American  public  men  believed  that  once  in  Cuba  we 
were  bound  to  stay;  that  our  "temporary"  occupation 
was  actually  for  all  time,  that  the  flag  having  been  run 
up  would  never  be  hauled  down.  Senator  Platt  was  not 
with  the  majority  in  this.  He  dreaded  annexation— 
the  bringing  of  Cuba  into  such  relations  with  the  United 
States  that  ultimately  she  would  be  pleading  for 
admission  to  the  sisterhood  of  States.  For  the  stability 
of  the  Cuban  people  he  had  a  profound  distrust.  But 
he  looked  upon  them  as  wards  for  a  period  to  be  guided 
and  guarded  until  they  should  show  themselves  capable 
of  self-control.  At  the  same  time  he  regarded  as 
"foolish"  the  Teller  amendment  to  the  resolution  of 
intervention  disclaiming  "  any  disposition  or  intention 
to  exercise  sovereignty,  jurisdiction,  or  control "  over  the 
island  except  for  its  pacification.  That  resolution  he 
regretted  as  hampering  the  otherwise  free  action  of  the 
United  States. 1  He  assumed  the  chairmanship  in  the 

i  The  United  States  Government  must  have  a  policy  with  regard 
to  Cuba,  and  that  policy  must  be  one  which  is  the  best  possible 
under  conditions  as  they  exist.  I  think  annexation  is  absolutely 
out  of  the  question.  In  the  first  place  the  Teller  resolution  stands 
not  only  in  the  way  of  that,  but  all  other  actions  which  we  might 
take  if  it  had  never  been  passed.  I  think  I  know  enough  of  con 
gressional  sentiment  to  know  that  it  is  regarded  as  a  pledge  of  the 
Government  against  annexation.  That  being  out  of  the  question 


On  Guard  over  Cuba  315 

hope  that  sooner  or  later  it  might  fall  to  his  lot  to  help 
shape  the  terms  of  restoration,  but  pending  such  a  time 
he  realized  that  his  committee  faced  a  problem 
toward  the  solution  of  which  the  past  experience  of 
the  United  States  furnished  no  assistance.  It  was  to  be 
determined  how  a  temporary  sovereignty  should  be 
exercised  over  territory  which  was  in  our  keeping  but 
the  inhabitants  of  which  were  not  of  our  fibre.  We 
could  not  exercise  full  sovereignty,  yet  we  had  made 
ourselves  responsible  for  the  establishment  and  con 
tinuance  of  good  government. 

He  became  Chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Cuban 
Relations  onDecember  14, 1899,  at  the  beginning  of  the 
first  session  of  the  Fifty-sixth  Congress.  We  were  then 
exercising  military  control  over  Cuba.  Leonard  Wood, 
a  major-general  of  volunteers,  appointed  on  December 
5,  1899,  had  succeeded  Major-General  John  R. 
Brooke  as  military  governor  on  December  i3th,  Gen 
eral  Brooke  having  been  in  command  at  Havana  for  one 
year.  The  military  authorities  were  in  complete  con 
trol  on  the  island  excepting  only  that  the  post-office 
was  under  the  direction  of  officials  selected  by  the 
post-office  department  and  subject  to  its  jurisdiction. 

It  was  providential  that  at  the  head  of  the  committee 
having  Cuban  affairs  in  charge  there  was  a  trained 
lawyer,  of  long  legislative  experience,  cautious  and 
conscientious.  It  may  be  doubted  whether  any  other 
could  have  been  selected  who  would  have  begun  at  once 
so  thorough  and  intelligent  an  inquiry  into  the  com 
plicated  questions  involved.  Mr.  Platt  not  only  studied 

what  next?  We  cannot  forever  remain  in  military  occupation. 
We  have  promised  them  an  independent  government,  and  when 
that  is  established  it  seems  to  me  we  must  withdraw. — Letter  to 
E.  F.  Atkins,  June  n,  1901. 


3i6  Orville  H.  Platt 

closely  all  published  authorities  but  supplemented  his 
study  by  consultation  with  those  who  were  most 
familiar  with  the  conditions  under  which  Cuba  had  come 
into  our  control.  He  appealed  especially  to  the  mem 
bers  of  the  American  Commission  which  negotiated 
the  treaty  of  peace  at  Paris.  Significant  of  the  kind 
of  inquiry  upon  which  he  felt  impelled  to  enter  is  a 
letter  which  he  wrote  on  December  23,  1899,  a  few 
days  after  assuming  the  chairmanship  of  the  committee, 
to  Judge  George  Gray  of  Delaware,  who  as  a  Senator 
had  been  a  member  of  the  Peace  Commission : 

Forgive  me  if  I  ask  you  for  your  private  opinion  as  to 
some  questions  that  are  troubling  me  at  the  outset  on  my 
assuming  the  duties  as  Chairman  of  the  Senate  Committee 
on  our  relations  with  Cuba. 

First, — where  does  that  thing,  or  contention,  or  right 
which  is  called  "sovereignty"  now  rest  as  regards  Cuba? 
Can  the  right  in  the  very  nature  of  things  be  in  abeyance; 
can  it  exist  in  an  unorganized  people?  If  you  had  not 
rejected  at  Paris  the  contention  of  the  Spanish  commis 
sioners  that  when  Spain  relinquished,  we  of  necessity 
took  the  sovereignty  of  Cuba,  I  should  be  inclined  to 
think  as  a  pure  legal  proposition,  that  we  did  take  and  had 
a  righu  to  exercise  some  kind  of  sovereignty  over  the 
island  and  its  people,  a  sovereignty  certainly  coupled  with 
a  self-imposed  trust,  and  in  the  nature  of  things,  temporary. 
But  you  reject  that  idea,  though,  as  I  read  the  memoran 
dum  attached  to  the  protocols,  you  did  not  go  very  fully 
or  exhaustively  into  the  question  as  to  where  the  sover 
eignty  over  Cuba  did  go  when  Spain  relinquished  it,  but 
if  we  did  not  accept  it  from  Spain,  did  we  get  a  qualified 
or  limited  right  of  sovereignty  by  virtue  of  our  military 
occupation?  It  is  not  from  the  desire  to  enter  into  an 
academic  discussion  of  the  question  that  I  am  seeking  a 
solution. 


On  Guard  over  Cuba  317 

We  are  to  be  immediately  pressed  for  all  sorts  of  legisla 
tion  with  reference  to  Cuba.  If  we  have  any  kind  of 
sovereignty  there  it  would  furnish  a  basis  for  legislation, 
but  admitting  that  we  have  none,  what  basis  is  there  for 
legislation  with  reference  to  the  island?  If  our  right  there 
is  only  that  of  military  occupancy  for  the  pacification  of  the 
island,  under  the  fourth  section  of  the  resolution  which  we 
passed,  how  can  we  legislate  at  all?  Can  we  as  a  Congress 
prescribe  the  form,  character,  and  limitations  of  the  govern 
ment  to  be  established  by  the  people  of  Cuba  ?  Can  we  even 
by  legislation  declare  who  may  participate  in  the  establish 
ment  of  such  government ;  can  we  now  create  a  debt  which 
shall  be  binding  on  the  island  when  the  new  government 
shall  have  been  established,  or  grant  franchises  which  shall 
run  and  be  valid  after  that ;  or  even  establish  customs  regu 
lations,  or  prescribe  taxes,  or  do  any  legislative  act  which 
would  be  in  our  power  if  we  have  sovereignty  there  ? 

You  will  observe  that  the  fourth  section  of  the  resolution 
to  which  I  have  referred  disclaims  any  intention  to  exercise 
sovereignty  except  for  the  pacification  of  the  island,  an 
implication  that  so  far  as  may  be  necessary  to  its  pacifica 
tion,  we  may  exercise  sovereignty,  but  how  wide  a  meaning 
is  to  be  given  to  that  word  "pacification"?  Military 
occupation  is  purely  an  executive  act,  arising  from  con 
quest  or  treaty.  The  powers  of  government  under  military 
occupancy  are  broad,  comprehensive,  and  scarcely  subject 
to  limitation.  How  far  can  Congress,  the  legislative  branch, 
interfere  with  the  executive  branch  of  our  Government  in 
the  matter  of  military  occupancy  and  administration  there 
under? 

I  notice  that  the  attorney-general  in  the  opinion  that  he 
gave  in  the  matter  of  allowing  the  Commercial  Cable 
Company  the  right  to  land  its  cable  on  the  island  of  Cuba 
makes  use  of  this  language: 

' '  While  not  meaning  to  concede  that  Congress  by  legisla 
tive  act  has  power  to  restrain  or  control  the  proper  exercise 
of  the  powers  of  the  commander-in-chief  of  the  army  and 


3i8  Orville  H.  Platt 

navy  of  the  United  States,  occupying  under  the  law  of 
belligerent  right,  foreign  territory — a  question  that  may  well 
be  open  to  doubt — yet,  etc." 

It  seems  to  me  that  the  question  of  whether  Congress 
may  direct  the  Executive  as  to  the  acts  which  he  shall 
perform,  or  order,  in  case  of  military  occupation,  may  well 
be  doubted. 

Cuba  is  not  a  part  of  the  United  States,  it  does  not  even 
belong  to  us.  For  every  conceivable  purpose  it  is  foreign 
territory,  is  it  not?  And  can  Congress  direct  the  Executive 
in  his  administration  of  affairs  of  a  foreign  territory  thus 
under  a  military  occupancy,  when  that  occupancy  is  by 
virtue  of  the  military  powers  entrusted  by  the  Constitu 
tion  to  him  as  commander- in-chief  ? 

We  did,  in  an  Appropriation  bill  as  you  will  remember, 
direct  that  no  "property,  franchises,  or  concessions  of  any 
kind  whatever,  shall  be  granted  by  the  United  States,  or 
any  military  or  other  authority  whatever,  in  the  island  of 
Cuba  during  the  occupation  thereof  by  the  United  States. ?>1 
Now  the  very  parties  that  wanted  that  legislation  passed 
want  us  to  repeal  it  as  to  granting  franchises.  I  did  not 
believe  in  it  when  it  was  done,  but  the  question  whether 
we  could  pass  such  legislation  did  not  occur  to  me  then. 

Admitting  that  we  have  the  power  to  direct  the  President 
in  the  exercise  of  his  military  authority  in  Cuba,  must  there 
not  be  some  limitations  on  our  right  to  do  that  ? 

I  know  that  each  one  of  the  queries  which  I  have  pro 
pounded  presents  a  case  for  the  final  determination  of  the 
Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States.  I  do  not  expect  that 
you  will  attempt  to  give  me  anything  like  an  opinion  which 
you  would  want  to  be  bound  by,  but  in  working  this  thing 
out  in  my  own  mind,  I  would  be  mighty  glad  to  avail  myself 
of  any  suggestions  that  you  might  be  willing  to  make  to  me, 
promising  that  I  will  treat  all  you  say  as  in  strict  confidence, 
not  even  communicating  it  to  the  committee,  or  members 
of  the  committee,  unless  you  would  be  willing  to  have  me. 

1  The  Foraker  Amendment. 


On  Guard  over  Cuba  319 

I  know  you  must  have  thought  of  these  questions  while 
in  Paris,  and  since  then,  and  it  is  no  mere  idle  talk  when 
I  say  that  I  should  give  a  great  deal  of  weight  to  your 
conclusions,  or  even  your  impressions. 

Members  of  the  commission  did  not  hesitate  to  say 
that  by  declining  to  have  the  sovereignty  of  Cuba 
relinquished  to  us  they  never  thought  that  we  escaped 
the  responsibility  of  sovereignty.  As  one  of  them 
explained : 

Spain  was  dealing  with  us.  We  were  a  party  to  the 
negotiations  in  which  she  relinquished  her  sovereignty, 
and  we  had  then  and  have  since  retained  military  control 
to  which  sovereignty  certainly  attached. 

But  the  working  out  of  technical  legal  questions  was 
only  a  small  part  of  the  task  which  the  Cuban  Com 
mittee  had  undertaken.  There  was  the  even  more 
pressing  and  immediate  practical  question  of  the 
administration  of  the  island  in  preparation  for  its  ulti 
mate  independence.  At  the  threshold  those  entrusted 
with  its  control  were  handicapped  by  the  Foraker 
Amendment  which,  while  it  had  the  wholesome  effect  of 
relieving  the  administration  of  our  dependencies  from 
suspicion  of  mercenary  intent,  prevented  the  exploita 
tion  of  Cuba  by  American  capital  at  the  very  moment 
when  her  industries  were  ripe  for  encouragement. 
The  commercial  development  of  the  island,  the  im 
provement  of  sociological  and  political  conditions  were 
all  matters  for  which  the  newly  organized  committee 
felt  itself  in  a  measure  responsible,  and  which  could  be 
dealt  with  far  more  intelligently  after  a  personal  study 
of  local  conditions.  No  sooner  was  the  most  pressing 
work  of  the  session  completed  than  Senator  Platt 
obtained  permission  from  the  Senate  for  a  subcom- 


320  Orville  H.  Platt 

mittee  to  visit  the  island  and  inquire  into  conditions 
existing  there.  The  Chairman  with  Senators  Aldrich 
and  Teller  constituted  the  subcommittee  which  left 
Washington  on  March  14,  1900,  and  returned  on  March 
3ist,  after  spending  ten  days  in  Cuba,  visiting  Havana, 
Cienfuegos  and  Matanzas,  interviewing  politicians  with 
regard  to  the  character  of  government  to  be  set  up, 
conferring  with  representatives  of  banking  and  in 
dustrial  interests,  examining  sugar  plantations,  and 
discussing  the  general  situation  with  the  military 
authorities.  There  probably  never  was  a  congressional 
excursion  which  was  more  completely  given  over  to  the 
business  immediately  in  hand,  and  the  Committee  were 
able  to  congratulate  themselves  later,  that  in  obedience 
to  the  scruples  of  the  Chairman  they  had  conscientiously 
paid  their  own  way,  declining  offers  of  hospitality 
which,  under  conditions  soon  to  develop,  might  have 
proved  embarrassing. 

It  was  fortunate  that  the  visit  of  the  Committee  was 
made  at  this  time,  for  hardly  had  they  returned  to 
Washington  when  out  of  a  clear  sky  shot  the  bolt  of 
scandal.  Neeley  and  Reeves,  two  officials  of  the  Cuban 
post-office,  were  found  false  to  their  trust.  Their 
defalcation  was  discovered  in  April,  1900,  through 
investigations  set  on  foot  by  General  Wood,  who  had 
been  led  to  suspect  irregularities  in  that  part  of  the 
Government  which  was  under  the  immediate  control  of 
the  director-general  of  posts.  It  was  the  spring  of  a 
Presidential  year  and  President  McKinley  was  about 
to  come  up  for  re-election.  The  Democratic  minority 
in  the  Senate  could  not  be  expected  to  let  so  promising 
an  opportunity  slip  for  making  political  capital. 

Senator  Bacon  of  Georgia,  on  May  nth,  introduced  a 
resolution  directing  the  Committee  on  Relations  with 


On  Guard  over  Cuba  321 

Cuba  to  investigate  and  report  to  the  Senate  ''as  early 
as  practicable"  regarding  the  moneys  received  and 
expended  in  the  island  of  Cuba  by,  through,  and  under 
the  officials  and  representatives  of  the  United  States, 
both  civil  and  military,  from  the  date  of  the  occupation 
of  Cuba  by  the  military  forces  of  the  United  States 
until  and  including  the  3oth  day  of  April,  ipoo.1 

i  The  original  Bacon  resolution  contained  the  following  comprehen 
sive  provisions:  "Resolved,  That  the  Committee  on  Relations  with 
Cuba  is  hereby  directed  to  investigate  and  report  to  the  Senate  as 
early  as  practicable  regarding  the  moneys  received  and  expended 
in  the  island  of  Cuba,  by,  through,  and  under  the  officials  and  repre 
sentatives  of  the  United  States,  both  civil  and  military,  from  the 
date  of  the  occupation  of  Cuba  by  the  military  forces  of  the  United 
States  until  and  including  the  3oth  day  of  April,  1900. 

"Said  committee  shall  investigate  and  report  as  to  the  receipts 
as  follows:  From  customs;  from  postal  service;  from  internal  reve 
nue;  from  all  other  sources,  specifying  the  details  as  far  as  prac 
ticable,  and  particularly  the  places  where,  and  dates  within  which 
said  amounts  were  collected  or  received,  and  the  officer  or  officers 
collecting  and  receiving  the  same,  as  well  as  the  law  or  authority 
under  which  said  amounts  were  in  each  instance  so  collected  or 
received. 

"Said  committee  shall  investigate  and  report  as  to  the  expendi 
tures  of  the  said  amounts  so  received,  the  necessity  and  propriety 
thereof,  specifying  in  classes  and  in  detail,  so  far  as  practicable, 
said  expenditures,  and  particularly  the  work,  services,  or  prop 
erty  for  which  said  expenditures  were  made  and  the  value 
thereof,  also  the  law  or  authority  under  which  each  of  said  ex 
penditures  was  made,  the  officer,  civil  or  military,  by  whom  said 
expenditure  was  authorized,  and  the  officer,  civil  or  military,  by 
whom  said  expenditure  was  made,  and  the  particular  fund  from 
which  the  money  was  taken  for  said  expenditure. 

"  Said  committee  shall  also  report  a  statement  of  all  public  works 
of  every  kind,  including  buildings,  wharves,  railroads,  and  all 
other  structures  built  or  constructed,  improved,  repaired,  or  decor 
ated  by  or  under  the  authority  of  any  such  officer,  civil,  or  military, 
and  in  each  instance  the  cost,  value,  necessity,  and  propriety  of 
the  same,  and  the  uses  to  which  said  buildings  or  structures  have 
been  put.  Where  said  buildings  and  works  were  constructed  or 
improvements  were  made  by  contract,  or  where  the  material  used 


322  Orville  H.  Platt 

At  the  same  time,  a  great  outcry  arose  over  the  extra 
allowances  made  to  the  military  governor  of  Cuba  and 
to  others  performing  civil  functions  in  the  island  of 
Cuba.  The  military  governor  received  in  addition  to 
his  salary  as  a  United  States  officer,  an  allowance  of 
$7500  a  year  out  of  the  Cuban  revenues.  The  military 
governor  of  Havana  received  $5000,  the  collector  of 
customs,  $1800,  and  the  treasurer  of  the  island,  $1800. 
It  was  not  contended  that  these  allowances  were  ex 
cessive,  only  that  they  were  illegal — which  they  were 
not.  But  whether  illegal  or  not,  the  raising  of  a  ques 
tion  concerning  them  necessitated  a  painstaking  defence 
of  the  administration,  while  the  introduction  of  Bacon's 
resolution  on  the  threshold  of  a  Presidential  campaign 
likewise  necessitated  an  investigation  by  the  Senate. 
Mr.  Platt  recognized  all  this,  although  he  regarded  the 
grant  of  extra  allowances  as  obviously  proper,  and 
although  a  Senate  investigation  was  superfluous,  as  a 
method  of  arriving  at  the  truth,  in  view  of  the  fact  that 
the  original  discovery  of  wrong-doing  had  been  made 
by  General  Wood  himself  and  that  all  those  involved  in 
peculation  had  been  summarily  dismissed  and  held  for 
trial.  The  Senator  was  tired  out  with  the  work  of  the 
session  and  longed  for  rest,  but  he  saw  himself  doomed 

in  the  same  was  furnished  by  contract,  the  committee  shall  report 
copies  of  each  of  said  contracts  and  the  names  of  all  parties 
interested  in  each  of  the  same. 

' '  Said  committee  shall  also  report  a  statement  of  the  personal 
property  which  was  purchased  or  procured  and  intrusted  to  any 
officer,  civil  or  military,  in  Cuba  within  said  time,  the  cost  and 
value  of  the  same,  and  the  uses  to  which  said  property  has  been 
put  and  the  disposition  which  has  been  made  thereof." 

To  this  Mr.  Platt  offered  an  amendment  empowering  the  com 
mittee  to  send  for  persons  and  papers,  to  administer  oaths,  to  hold 
their  sessions  during  the  session  or  recess  of  Congress  at  any  place 
they  might  determine,  and  to  employ  expert  accountants. 


On  Guard  over  Cuba  323 

immediately  to  the  delicate  and  difficult  task  of  manag 
ing  in  the  Senate  a  defence  of  the  administration  and 
then  to  a  wearisome  and  fruitless  inquiry  into  a  subject 
the  possibilities  of  which  had  already  been  exhausted. 
It  was  indeed  a  test  of  his  devotion  to  public  duty. 


CHAPTER  XXV 

CUBAN  SCANDALS  AND  ALLOWANCES 

Investigation  Authorized — Speech  of  May  23,  1900 — Longing  for 
Home — Correspondence  with  General  Wood. 

THE  closing  weeks  of  a  long  session  of  Congress  are 
always  dreary.  Senators  and  Representatives 
exhausted  with  the  winter's  vigil  are  eager  to  be  away. 
The  summer's  heat  of  Washington  is  enervating  and 
depressing.  For  Senator  Platt  this  summer  of  the 
Cuban  scandals  was  especially  trying.  It  was  his  lot 
to  be  the  watcher  on  the  tower,  jealously  noting  every 
changing  phase  of  legislation.  Mrs.  Platt  was  at 
Kirby  Corner,  making  the  new  home  ready  for  the 
summer,  and  he  was  left  alone  in  the  plainly  furnished 
rooms  which  served  him  for  winter  quarters  at  the 
Arlington  Hotel.  He  longed  to  be  through  with  it. 
As  the  spring  foliage  began  to  take  on  life,  his  thoughts 
turned  toward  the  Litchfield  hills.  One  Sunday  he 
was  able  to  spend  in  Judea.  Once  or  twice  he  seized 
the  opportunity  to  run  out  a  few  miles  to  Washington 
Grove,  where  a  relative  had  a  rough  little  summer 
cottage,  and  where  he  had  a  quiet  time  sitting  on  the 
porch  most  of  the  day  meditating,  with  nobody  near 
but  his  faithful  colored  servant,  James  Hurley.  But  all 
the  while  the  birds  of  the  Litchfield  woods  were  singing 
in  his  ear.  Every  day  he  penned  a  message  to  Mrs. 

324 


Cuban  Scandals  and  Allowances       325 

Platt,  most  of  which  breathed  a  longing  to  be  home. 
On  May  day  he  writes: 

The  leaves  must  be  coming  out,  the  blossoms  beginning 
to  show,  the  grass  green,  the  hotbed  developing  lettuce  and 
radishes,  the  robins  building  in  the  apple  trees,  and  the 
Phoebe  birds  under  the  porch. 

Again  he  writes: 

It  is  a  pretty  picture  you  draw  in  little  touches  here  and 
there — the  magnolia  in  bloom,  the  velvet  grass,  the  gray 
barnyard  fence — it  makes  me  think  of  Jerusalem,  my  happy 
home. 

As  the  days  dragged  their  slow  length  along,  the 
yearning  became  more  intense: 

I  think  I  know  what  you  are  doing,  just  starting  up  the 
lane  for  church.  I  wish  I  were  going  with  you.  I  have 
a  picture  in  my  mind  I  can  see  it  all,  even  to  each  vine 
that  runs  on  the  wall,  and  the  flowers  that  grow  on  the 
Rossiter  rocks  by  the  roadside.  ...  I  wish  we  could  skip 
these  last  days — so  many  things  will  go  through  which 
ought  not  to,  and  so  many  things  will  fail  which  ought  to 
pass.  I  must  keep  my  temper  and  my  good  nature  and  not 
allow  myself  to  be  disagreeable  because  I  can't  have  my 
own  way.  .  .  .  How  little  we  can  foresee  what  we  can  do. 
I  had  been  looking  forward  to  a  rest  this  summer,  and  now 
this  Cuban  business  comes  in  to  disturb  my  mind  and  take 
up  my  time — how  much  of  it,  I  don't  know.  Then  comes 
the  Presidential  election.  So  I  don't  see  much  rest  ahead — 
mental  rest  at  all  events. 

Again  he  cries: 

I  want  to  go  fishing.  But  each  day  here  has  its  special 
duties,  and  it  is  really  hard  to  get  away  without  letting 
something  pass  which  ought  not  to  pass.  To-morrow  it 
is  the  Boer  resolution.  What  it  will  be  Monday  I  don't 
know;  but  it  will  be  something.  You  needn't  be  afraid 


326  Orville  H.  Platt 

that  I  will  break  down.     I  think  that  I  live  and  thrive  on 
work. 

All  this  time  with  his  thoughts  turned  homeward 
Senator  Platt  was  faithful  to  the  drudgery  of  his  trust. 
He  knew  that  the  administration  must  depend  upon 
him  and  perhaps  one  other  for  its  defence  against  Demo 
cratic  attacks.  The  brief  letters  jotted  down  in  those 
days — sometimes  in  his  room  at  the  hotel,  sometimes 
at  his  desk  in  the  Senate  chamber,  give  an  intimate 
insight  into  the  developments  week  by  week.  A  few 
excerpts  will  serve  to  show  how  the  responsibilities 
weighed  on  his  mind: 

April  26,  1900: 

I  am  full  of  the  President's  defence  on  the  Cuban  al 
lowances  now.  It  is  right  that  I  should  do  it,  and  when 
I  look  the  Senate  over  there  seems  to  be  no  one  to  do  it, 
or  I  might  say  that  can  do  it,  except  Spooner  and  myself. 
Perhaps  there  may  be  no  occasion  for  it,  but  on  such  things 
one  has  to  be  always  ready  for  what  may  come. 

May  1 7 : 

This  Cuban  stealing  business  is  making  me  lots  of  trouble. 
We  have  got  to  let  the  Bacon  resolution  pass.  And  then 
we  must  investigate — that  is,  I  must.  Who  will  help  me 
I  don't  know.  It  is  an  onerous  task.  The  Cuban  scandal 
is  really  bad  and  mortifying.  The  Democrats  and  Populists 
are  making  all  they  can  of  it  and  the  worst  is  they  have  too 
much  ground  to  go  on. 

May  18: 

Last  evening  I  went  over  to  the  War  Department  and 
spent  the  time  until  midnight  talking  over  Cuban  affairs. 

May  19: 

.What  disturbs  me  more  than  anything  else  is  the  dis 
closures  which  come  out  about  Cuban  affairs.  They  seem 


Cuban  Scandals  and  Allowances       327 

worse  and  worse.     I  don't  know  that  we  shall  ever  get  to 
the  bottom  of  them. 

May  20: 

Have  been  worrying  about  Cuban  affairs.  You  don't 
know  how  embarrassed  I  am.  The  New  York  World  and 
New  York  Journal  are  full  of  it  to-day,  with  scare  headlines, 
portraits,  reasons,  suspicions,  etc.  I  confess  I  do  not  know 
how  to  treat  the  matter.  It  is  not  easy.  Spooner  and  I 
have  got  to  make  the  best  of  it.  Well,  no  matter!  I  shall 
live  it  through,  and  I  shall  take  care  of  the  administration. 

May  22,  n.oo  P.M. 

I  have  thought  and  thought  and  worried  as  to  what  I 
should  say  about  this  Cuban  matter.  The  things  which 
come  to  light  each  day  make  what  I  had  thought  of  saying 
unwise.  So  I  have  to  change  my  tactics  every  morning; 
and  when  I  shall  say  something  I  presume  the  lively  capers 
of  the  next  day  will  make  it  entirely  out  of  place  and  in 
admissible.  But  I  must  do  it  to-morrow.  Can't  wait  any 
longer.  I  am  making  no  notes.  As  usual  I  must  trust  to 
luck.  Hope  I  shall  sleep  well  to-night  and  be  fresh  in  the 
morning. 

May  23,  n.oo  P.M.: 

I  've  done  it.  Good,  bad,  or  indifferent,  my  speech  is 
off  my  hands,  if  not  off  my  mind.  I  'm  not  satisfied  with 
it;  others  pretend  they  are.  It  was  a  hard  speech  to  make, 
but  I  did  as  well  as  I  could.  It  tired  me  though.  Spooner 
and  I  had  the  day  to  ourselves.  He  was  magnificent.  I 
wish  I  could  speak  as  well  as  he. 

May  24* 

Spooner  made  a  magnificent  speech.  He  easily  eclipses 
me,  but  I  am  not  envious.  I  help  him  and  rejoice  in  it. 
He  is  going  home  just  as  soon  as  he  gets  his  speech  in  the 
record,  and  will  not  come  back.  Then  I  shall  have  it  all 


328  Orville  H.  Platt 

alone,  and  no  one  to  help  carry  my  burden.  It 's  foolish 
to  think  I  have  a  burden,  but  I  can't  help  it.  I  did  look 
forward  to  rest  and  comfort  at  home  after  adjournment ;  but 
I  don't  know  what  this  Cuban  investigation  will  bring 
forth. 

The  speech  of  May  23d,  in  spite  of  his  misgivings 
was  one  of  the  most  effective  he  ever  made  in  the 
Senate.  He  did  not  deny  or  condone  the  offence  of  the 
recreant  American  officials  who  had  brought  the  Cuban 
scandal  upon  the  administration: 

The  Senator  from  Georgia  has  no  monopoly  of  the 
humiliation,  indignation,  and  shame  which  should  be 
and  are  felt  by  every  honest  and  patriotic  man  in  the 
United  States.  The  disclosures  in  Cuba  are  shocking. 
They  strike  a  blow,  and  a  direct  blow  at  every  citizen  of 
the  United  States.  If  the  defalcation  of  Mr.  Neeley  had 
occurred  in  Boston  or  New  York  or  Washington,  it  would 
have  been  a  sad  and  shameful  affair,  but  it  would  not  have 
been  so  sad  and  shameful  as  when  it  occurs  in  a  country 
under  our  guardianship,  for  the  administration  of  whose 
affairs  with  honesty  and  economy  we  are  responsible,  not 
only  to  the  people  of  Cuba  but  to  ourselves  and  the  world 
as  well.  Nothing  that  has  occurred  in  the  history  of 
defalcations  has  made  such  an  impression  upon  the  public 
mind  as  this,  and  justly  so;  and  more  than  in  any  other 
case  is  it  incumbent  upon  the  Government  to  probe  this 
to  the  very  bottom,  unsparingly,  unceasingly,  without 
hesitation,  without  reference  to  who  may  be  complicated 
or  concerned. 

But  he  was  indignant  that  what  had  really  occurred, 
shameful  as  it  was,  should  be  amplified  and  exaggerated 
and  seized  upon  for  the  purpose  of  a  political  campaign 
to  convince  the  people  that  our  administration  in  Cuba 


Cuban  Scandals  and  Allowances       329 

was  disgracefully  lax  and  dishonest  throughout.  He 
dwelt  upon  the  fact  that  General  Wood  had  discovered 
the  irregularities  and  taken  steps  to  punish  them;  he 
went  in  great  detail  into  the  administration  of  the  island ; 
he  compared  the  expenditures  in  Cuba  with  the  ex 
penditures  in  states  and  municipalities  of  the  United 
States;  he  declared  that  the  extra  allowances  were 
necessary  unless  we  proposed  to  treat  our  officers  in 
Cuba  charged  with  the  administration  of  civil  affairs 
"with  a  parsimony  and  meanness  which  would  bring 
the  blush  of  shame  to  the  cheek  of  every  American 
citizen." 

Senator  Bacon  had  asked  what  the  United  States  was 
doing  in  Cuba;  what  our  authority  was  for  being  there, 
and  why  we  did  not  come  away.  To  this  Mr.  Platt 
replied : 

We  are  there  because  the  American  people,  acting  through 
Congress,  directed  the  President  of  the  United  States,  as 
commander-in-chief  of  the  armies  and  navies  of  the  United 
States,  to  go  to  Cuba  and  destroy  the  power  of  Spain  there. 
That  is  why  we  are  there. 

I  agree  that  the  situation  in  Cuba  is  unique,  that  history 
does  not  furnish  a  parallel,  that  no  precisely  similar  case 
has  been  treated  by  writers  upon  international  law,  that 
our  relations  there  must  be  determined  upon  general 
principles  and  the  necessity  of  the  situation. 

Mr.  President,  I  was  not  in  favor  of  the  war  with  Spain. 
I  believed  that  it  might  have  been  avoided  with  honor  and 
with  the  security  of  freedom  to  the  island  of  Cuba.  But  the 
American  people  said  "NO";  and  when,  by  accident  or 
design,  the  good  ship  Maine,  with  its  American  sailors  on 
board,  was  blown  into  the  air,  and  its  sailors  found  a  grave 
in  the  harbor  of  Havana,  there  was  no  power  on  earth  that 
could  prevent  the  war.  When  that  war  was  declared,  I 
accepted  the  consequences.  I  thought  I  saw  then  more 


330  Orville  H.  Platt 

clearly  than  a  good  many  of  the  people  who  were  urging  us 
on  in  hot  haste  to  engage  in  war. 

I  thought  I  saw  that  if  we  turned  Spain  out  of  Cuba  we 
would  become  responsible  not  only  to  Spain  and  the 
Cuban  people  but  to  ourselves  and  to  the  whole  world  for 
the  proper  administration  of  the  affairs  of  Cuba  and  the 
erection  of  a  proper  Republican  Government  there.  We 
have  a  duty  to  perform  in  Cuba  yet,  as  we  had  a  supposed 
duty  to  perform  when  we  went  there  to  free  the  people  of 
Cuba.  That  duty  is  not  yet  discharged.  The  American 
people  will  see  to  it  that  that  duty  is  fully  and  completely 
discharged,  as  much  as  they  saw  that  its  performance  was 
begun. 

What  is  that  duty?  It  is  that  our  only  right  to  be  in 
Cuba  is  because  in  the  resolution  of  intervention  the  fourth 
paragraph  said  this: 

"  Fourth:  That  the  United  States  hereby  disclaims  any 
disposition  or  intention  to  exercise  sovereignty,  jurisdiction, 
or  control  over  said  island  except  for  the  pacification  there 
of,  and  asserts  its  determination,  when  that  is  accomplished, 
to  leave  the  government  and  control  of  the  island  to  its 
people." 

It  is  said  that  is  our  only  warrant  for  being  there;  that 
we  are  self-constituted  agents  for  the  purpose  of  the 
pacification  of  the  island,  with  a  duty  to  leave  the  moment 
that  pacification  is  accomplished.  Well,  there  is  a  little 
more  than  that,  Mr.  President.  .  .  .  There  was  war  with 
Spain,  and  a  portion  of  Spain  was  conquered.  Then 
we  had  a  preliminary  treaty  of  peace,  and  by  that  treaty 
of  peace  we  came,  as  the  conquerors,  into  possession  of  the 
island  of  Cuba,  and  by  that  treaty  of  peace  we  agreed  to 
do  something,  too.  Article  I  of  that  treaty  says: 

"  ARTICLE  I.  Spain  relinquishes  all  claim  of  sovereignty 
over  and  title  to  Cuba. 

"And  as  the  island  is,  upon  its  evacuation  by  Spain, 
to  be  occupied  by  the  United  States,  the  United  States 
will,  so  long  as  such  occupation  shall  last,  assume  and  dis- 


Cuban  Scandals  and  Allowances       331 

charge  the  obligations  that  may  under  international  law 
result  from  the  fact  of  its  occupation,  for  the  protection  of 
life  and  property." 

That  was  our  agreement  with  Spain.  Why  did  we  make 
it?  Because  the  ambassador  of  France,  in  negotiating  the 
protocol,  insisted  upon  it;  that  is  why  that  was  inserted 
in  the  treaty  of  peace  with  Spain.  .  .  . 

Up  to  the  time  of  the  evacuation  by  Spain  our  occu 
pancy  was  a  military  occupancy,  and  was  so  recognized  by 
the  treaty.  When  the  evacuation  was  made  and  the  pro 
perty  turned  over  to  us,  it  was  turned  over  to  the  military 
authorities.  .  .  .  That  occupation  will  cease  to  be  a  military 
occupation  when,  under  that  military  occupation,  an 
opportunity  shall  have  been  given  to  the  people  of  Cuba 
to  set  up  for  themselves  a  government  to  which  we  may 
turn  over  the  island  and  to  which  we  may  leave  the  govern 
ment  and  control  of  the  island. 

What  does  "pacification"  mean  in  that  clause?  Does  it 
mean  merely  the  establishment  of  nominal  and  formal  peace? 
Does  it  mean  so  soon  as  hostilities  ceased  our  troops  were 
to  be  withdrawn  and  the  island  left  to  all  the  contentions 
and  factions  which  existed  there?  No,  Mr.  President;  we 
became  responsible  for  something  else  than  mere  nominal 
peace  in  the  island  of  Cuba.  We  became  responsible  for 
the  establishment  of  a  government  there,  which  we  would 
be  willing  to  indorse  to  the  people  of  the  world — a  stable 
government,  a  government  for  which  we  would  be  willing 
to  be  responsible  in  the  eyes  of  the  world.  Until  that  time 
occurs,  no  patriotic  American  will  ask  that  our  troops  and 
our  government  be  withdrawn  from  the  island  of  Cuba. 

His  concluding  words  were  impressive : 

Mr.  President,  I  have  spoken  longer  than  I  intended  on 
this  subject.  I  repeat  what  I  said  at  first,  that  the  charges 
by  way  of  insinuation,  innuendo,  rumor,  scandal,  and  mud 
throwing,  have  made  it  necessary  that  this  investigation 
should  go  on;  and  whatever  of  personal  discomfort  may 


332  Orville  H.  Platt 

be  encountered,  I  am  willing  to  accept  it,  and,  so  far  as  I 
am  concerned,  to  promise  that  nothing  shall  be  covered 
up;  that  everything  shall  be  brought  to  the  light  of  day; 
that  the  keen  sunlight  of  publicity  shall  be  turned  upon  the 
administration  in  Cuba ;  and,  Mr.  President,  I  entertain  a 
confidence,  which  is  not  to  be  shaken  until  the  facts  shall 
shake  it,  that  when  that  investigation  has  been  concluded 
it  will  definitely  appear  that  we  have  been  regaled  with 
grossest  exaggerations  and  with  the  most  uncalled  for  sus 
picions;  and  that  we  shall  find  that  our  army  officers  now, 
as  ever,  can  be  trusted,  and  are  honest  and  upright,  and 
that  our  civil  officers  may  also  be  trusted  as  upright  men, 
although  it  unfortunately  appears  that  some  of  them  have 
now  gone  so  wickedly  and  lamentably  astray. 

The  resolutions  were  adopted  and  he  prepared  to  de 
vote  himself  for  weary  months  to  a  distasteful  task, 
involving  exhaustive  hearings  and  painstaking  reports. 
It  was  over  a  year  before  the  Committee  completed  its 
work,  after  calling  on  the  departments  involved  for 
detailed  reports  covering  almost  every  conceivable 
transaction:  and  it  was  not  until  March  15,  1901,  that 
the  Secretary  of  War  sent  to  the  Committee  the  last 
information  called  for  by  the  resolution  of  investiga 
tion,  so  that  the  final  report  could  be  made. 

In  the  meantime  Mr.  Platt  at  the  request  of  General 
Wood  had  taken  up  other  questions  relating  to  the 
government  of  the  island.  General  Wood  was  especially 
urgent  that  there  should  no  longer  be  a  division  of  con 
trol  in  Cuba  and  that  the  entire  administration  should 
be  in  the  hands  of  the  military  authorities.  Writing 
to  him  on  May  31,  1900,  Mr.  Platt  said: 

I  thoroughly  agree  with  you  in  your  suggestion  that  you 
ought  to  have  undivided  control  in  Cuba  and  I  had  seen 
the  President  about  your  office  before  I  received  your  letter 


Cuban  Scandals  and  Allowances       333 

and  since.  I  think  he  intends  to  put  the  postal  matters 
under  your  control,  but  he  wants  to  do  it  in  a  way  and  at  a 
time  when  it  will  not  appear  to  the  country  as  it  if  were  a 
reflection  on  the  postmaster-general.  I  do  not  know  just 
what  he  will  do  or  how  he  will  do  it.  I  fear  he  will  try  to 
make  a  sort  of  double  headed  arrangement  which  will  still 
be  under  the  Post-Office  Department.  I  am  going  to  keep 
the  matter  before  him,  however.  I  suppose  you  get  the 
Congressional  Record  and  have  kept  track  of  the  talk  we 
have  had  in  Congress  and  especially  in  the  Senate  which  has 
resulted  in  ordering  an  investigation  by  our  Committee. 
The  stealings  have  been  very  unfortunate  and  have  only 
been  relieved  from  working  a  great  deal  of  dissension  politi 
cally  by  the  fact  that  they  were  discovered  and  exposed  by 
you,  and  the  public  having  confidence  that  you  will  follow 
them  up  and  will  not  tolerate  any  crookedness  anywhere. 
The  whole  Congress  is  nervous  and  liable  to  take  the  bits 
in  its  teeth  and  say  we  ought  to  get  out  of  Cuba,  and  it 
requires  a  steady  hand  to  keep  things  straight  now  in  the 
last  days  of  this  session.  We  hope  to  adjourn  on  the 
6th  of  June,  and  if  we  can  accomplish  it  matters  will  be 
comparatively  safe.  I  think  we  shall  now,  and  that  the 
pressure  of  other  things  is  going  to  prevent  any  action 
whatever  with  reference  to  Cuban  affairs  beyond  the  in 
vestigation  which  has  been  ordered  and  which  will  have 
to  go  on  during  the  recess. 

I  had  fully  intended  at  the  close  of  the  session  to  propose 
a  modification  of  the  Foraker  amendment,  but,  to  tell  the 
truth,  I  do  not  dare  to  do  it  now.  The  Democrats  are 
seeking  every  possible  opportunity  to  charge,  and,  where 
they  cannot  charge  they  insinuate,  that  everything  is  wrong 
in  Cuba,  that  while  frauds  have  appeared  only  in  the  postal 
system  the  military  government  has  been  characterized  by 
extravagant  expenditure.  As  to  the  latter,  they  have 
made  very  little  impression,  however,  but,  if  we  proposed 
now  to  modify  the  Foraker  amendment,  it  would  be  seized 
upon  by  them  as  an  evidence  that  political  friends  are  going 


334  Orville  H.  Platt 

to  have  an  opportunity  to  exploit  schemes  and  plans  for 
their  profit  and  advantage,  and  bring  up  again  this  whole 
Cuban  discussion  and  more  of  it,  and  would  point  to  it  as  an 
evidence  that  we  did  not  intend  to  leave  the  island  and  were 
only  planning  to  continue  Occupancy  indefinitely.  I  have 
talked  to  Senator  Foraker  about  it  and,  while  he  believes 
the  amendment  ought  to  be  modified,  he  agrees  with  me 
that  it  is  a  mighty  bad  time  to  bring  it  up.  Of  course, 
you  can  go  along  the  same  way  until  the  next  session  of 
Congress  when  the  Presidential  election  will  be  past  and 
all  this  unquiet  and  nervous  condition  will  have  gone  by, 
and  we  can  discuss  the  merits  of  the  situation  without  any 
reference  to  the  political  advantage ;  in  other  words,  when 
reason  will  have  resumed  its  sway. 

I  realize  your  embarrassment  and  the  tremendous 
responsibility  placed  upon  you  and  the  difficult  problem 
you  have  to  work  out,  and  my  idea  is  that  the  thing  to  do 
at  this  time  is  to  keep  quiet.  They  have  not  shaken  con 
fidence  in  you  to  any  extent  and  I  do  not  believe  they 
will.  Just  how  fast  or  far  we  shall  progress  with  this 
investigation,  or  whether  we  shall  have  to  visit  Cuba 
and  make  inquiries  there,  I  am  unable  to  say.  We  want  to 
pursue  the  investigation  honestly  and  thoroughly,  believing 
that  everything  that  is  now  disclosed  will  justify  your  con 
duct  there  and  give  evidence  to  the  people  that  you  are 
faithfully  and  wisely  bringing  about  the  independence 
which  we  have  promised  to  Cuba.  If  we  had  made  no  pro 
mise  there  would  be  I  think  a  strong  annexation  sentiment 
among  the  business  people  of  the  United  States  and  of 
belief  that  our  promise  of  pacification  included  the  establish 
ment  of  a  government  which  should  be  a  republic  in  fact 
as  well  as  in  name,  and  with  which  we  should  have  such  rela 
tions  as  would  safeguard  and  protect  not  only  the  interests 
of  Cuba,  but  our  own  interests  with  relation  thereto. 

The  accumulation  of  unwelcome  tasks  meant  months 
of  dismal  drudgery  to  Senator  Platt.  Just  how  great 


Cuban  Scandals  and  Allowances       335 

a  sacrifice  it  all  was  to  him  may  be  gleaned  from  his 
correspondence.  Congress  adjourned  the  last  week  in 
June,  and  he  hurried  home  to  Judea  for  such  rest  as  he 
could  get.  Writing  from  there  to  John  H.  Flagg  he 
says: 

My  summer  seems  already  broken  up.  I  have  to  enjoy 
this  place  thinking  about  it  when  I  am  far  away  from 
it.  If  there  is  anything  that  will  bring  you  health,  enjoy 
ment,  and  happiness  it  is  this  Litchfield  County  life.  I  have 
read  first  and  last  a  good  many  entertaining  disquisitions 
on  where  the  Garden  of  Eden  was  located,  but  it  seems 
strange  that  in  all  the  places  that  have  been  claimed  for 
it  between  the  North  and  South  Poles,  no  one  has  ever  said 
Litchfield  County,  but  I  am  sure  that  this  was  the  original 
paradise.  Norfolk  is  rather  on  the  outer  edge  of  it.  Wash 
ington,  and  especially  the  Judea  end  of  Washington,  was 
right  in  the  centre  of  the  garden.  I  do  not  think  that  the 
tree  of  knowledge  of  good  and  evil  where  Eve  cut  up  such  a 
prank  at  the  instance  of  Old  Nick  was  just  hereabouts.  I 
think  she  must  have  wandered  out  of  the  garden  a  little 
to  find  the  tree ;  for  every  tree  here  is  pleasant  to  the  sight 
and  good  for  food. 

But  that  summer  was  to  be  a  busy  one,  with  little 
in  it  of  the  peace  of  Judea.  Not  only  was  he  burdened 
with  the  work  of  analyzing  Cuban  finances  but  he  was 
called  upon  as  usual  to  bear  his  part  in  the  Presidential 
campaign  which  resulted  in  the  election  of  McKinley 
and  Roosevelt.  When  he  returned  to  Washington  at 
the  beginning  of  the  short  session  in  December  he  was 
weary  rather  than  rested  by  this  summer's  absence;  but 
the  session  upon  which  he  was  about  to  enter  proved  to 
be  one  of  the  most  exhausting,  as  it  was  perhaps  the 
most  momentous  of  his  entire  career. 


CHAPTER  XXVI 

THE  PLATT  AMENDMENT 

Establishing  a  New  Republic — Conferences  of  Cuban  Committee — 
The  Question  of  Authorship. 

IN  the  fall  of  1900,  the  emancipated  Cuban  people  had 
their  first  opportunity  to  show  their  capacity  for 
self-government.  Having  been  subject  for  two  years 
to  the  military  control  of  the  United  States  they  were 
at  last  in  the  judgment  of  General  Wood  and  the  ad 
ministration  at  Washington  so  well  settled  under  new 
conditions  that  they  might  properly  be  entrusted  with 
the  setting  up  of  governmental  machinery  of  their 
own.  The  course  of  the  United  States  in  the  island 
had  been  an  example  for  mankind.  We  had  freed  its 
inhabitants  from  oppression  and  furnished  its  starving 
people  with  food;  we  had  remodelled  its  cities  and 
introduced  systems  of  sanitation,  where  filth  had 
prevailed  for  centuries ;  we  had  stamped  out  the  plague 
of  yellow  fever ;  we  had  established  a  school  system  and 
set  the  feet  of  the  people  in  the  way  of  orderly  advance 
ment;  we  had  restored  them  to  their  peaceful  occupa 
tions  and  protected  them  in  their  industrial  rights.  In 
the  words  of  Senator  Platt  we  had  brought  order  out 
of  chaos,  tranquillity  out  of  horror,  happiness  out  of 
misery;  we  had  stamped  out  pestilence,  substituted 
education  for  ignorance,  and  grafted  as  rapidly  as  pos 
sible  the  spirit  of  American  institutions  upon  a  corrupt 

336 


The  Platt  Amendment  337 

civilization.  We  had  done  for  Cuba  what  no  nation  on 
earth  ever  did  for  a  conquered  province. 

Yet  all  this  was  in  preparation  not  for  the  territorial 
aggrandizement  of  the  United  States  but  for  the 
creation  of  a  new  nationality,  the  establishment  of  an 
independent  republic.  All  the  preliminaries  to  such 
a  result  were  consequently  carried  into  effect. 

A  census  of  the  population  was  taken;  municipal 
elections  were  held  and  municipal  governments  estab 
lished;  the  conditions  of  suffrage  were  prescribed,  and 
finally  on  July  25,  1900,  President  McKinley  ordered  an 
election  of  delegates  to  frame  a  constitution.  Carrying 
out  the  implied  obligations  assumed  in  the  treaty  of 
peace,  it  was  provided  in  the  order  initiating  the  con 
stitutional  convention  that  the  delegates  in  framing  a 
constitution  should  "  as  a  part  thereof  provide  for  and 
agree  with  the  Government  of  the  United  States  upon 
the  relations  to  exist  between  that  Government  and 
the  government  of  Cuba." 

The  convention  thus  chosen  assembled  at  Havana  on 
the  first  Monday  of  November,  1900.  It  was  controlled 
by  the  most  radical  element  of  the  Cuban  electorate. 
Its  leaders  represented  the  revolutionary  and  reac 
tionary  faction,  irresponsible  as  children,  jealous  of 
outside  influences,  dazzled  with  the  prospect  of  at  last 
being  their  own  masters.  For  three  months  they  were 
in  session,  doing  their  work  without  interference  or 
suggestion  from  Washington,  but  not  without  close 
observation  by  the  leaders  there. 

In  due  time  it  appeared  that  the  general  features 
of  the  new  constitution  had  been  agreed  upon.  There 
was  not  a  line  expressing  obligation,  gratitude,  or  even 
friendliness  to  the  United  States,  not  a  word  of  recogni 
tion  either  of  the  service  rendered  by  this  Government 


338  Orville  H.  Platt 

or  of  our  interest  in  the  island's  future.  It  was  plainly 
the  short-sighted  plan  of  the  delegates  to  submit  to 
Congress,  before  adjournment  on  March  4th,  a  consti 
tution  ignoring  altogether  the  question  of  the  future 
relations  between  the  two  countries,  relying  on  Congress 
to  recognize  the  constitution  and  direct  the  withdrawal 
of  American  troops,  leaving  the  Cubans  to  do  as  they 
might  please  in  establishing  new  relations. 

As  this  purpose  dawned  gradually  on  the  leaders 
of  the  Senate,  they  began  to  consider  whether  legisla 
tion  should  not  be  undertaken  immediately  to  deter 
mine  our  future  relations.  It  was  the  short  session 
of  Congress,  and  the  threatened  filibuster  against  the 
shipping  bill  made  it  extremely  doubtful  whether  any 
measures  except  the  regular  supply  bills  could  be  en 
acted.  Mr.  Platt  as  Chairman  of  the  Committee  on 
Cuban  Relations  was  the  responsible  leader  to  whom 
others  looked  for  guidance.  For  a  time  he  feared  that 
it  would  not  be  possible  to  enact  in  so  short  a  time 
legislation  of  such  far-reaching  consequence  and  he  was 
inclined  to  leave  President  McKinley  to  deal  as  best  he 
could  with  Cuba,  calling  Congress  together  in  extra 
ordinary  session,  if  need  be,  before  withdrawing  United 
States  troops  and  turning  the  island  over  to  its  own 
people.  But  as  time  went  on  and  the  unreasonableness 
of  the  Cuban  Convention  became  more  apparent,  he 
determined  at  last  to  make  the  attempt  at  shaping  the 
necessary  law  before  the  4th  of  March.  Accordingly 
on  January  30,  1901,  he  sent  the  following  note  to  the 
Republican  members  of  the  Committee : 

I  think  it  very  important  that  the  Republican  members 
of  the  Committee  on  Relations  with  Cuba  should  have  an 
informal  conference,  and  therefore  ask  that  you  will  meet 


The  Platt  Amendment  339 

with  other  Republican    members    at   Senator  Chandler's 
house  at  three  o'clock  Sunday  afternoon. 

In  Senator  Chandler's  diary  for  February  3d,  is  this 
laconic  entry : 

At  3  O.  H.  Platt,  Aldrich,  McMillan,  Spooner,and  Cullom 
called  (1421  I  street)  and  we  talked  of  Cuban  affairs. 

One  week  later  there  is  the  further  entry : 

At  2  Platt,  McMillan,  Aldrich,  Cullom,  and  Spooner  at 
my  house,  on  Cuba. 

Of  what  was  said  at  these  meetings  there  is  no  official 
record,  but  Mr.  Chandler  has  given  his  recollection  of 
the  first  conference : 

There  was  free  talk  concerning  the  conditions  which 
the  United  States  would  wish  to  ask  of  Cuba  and  which  we 
hoped  the  sensitiveness  of  the  Cuban  people  would  not  keep 
them  from  acceding  to.  There  being  a  fear  that  Cuba  might 
not  like  to  incorporate  into  the  body  of  her  free  constitu 
tion  any  clauses  giving  rights  to  another  country,  it  was 
agreed  that  it  would  be  best  to  propose  that  our  conditions 
if  not  inserted  in  the  constitution  should  be  recited  in  "an 
ordinance  appended  thereto. "  It  was  easily  agreed  that 
we  must  insist  upon  the  continued  maintenance  by  Cuba 
of  all  the  sanitary  arrangements  to  prevent  the  spread  of 
disease  which  had  been  made  during  our  occupancy,  these 
being  considered  as  of  vital  importance  to  the  United  States 
as  well  as  Cuba.  The  danger  that  the  newly  liberated 
people  would  plunge  recklessly  in  debt  was  the  most  serious 
subject  of  conversation.  The  tendency  in  such  cases  was 
adverted  to,  and  we  all  quickly  agreed  that  there  must  be 
some  provision  that  Cuba  should  not  run  into  debt  beyond 
her  means  to  pay.  The  danger  that  in  such  an  event  the 
money  would  be  borrowed  in  Europe  and  that  in  default 
of  payment  European  Powers  would  threaten  to  occupy 
Cuba  was  comprehended.  Every  provision  that  could  be 


340  Orville  H.  Platt 

thought  of  as  desirable  and  that  was  afterwards  adopted 
was  discussed.  It  was  readily  agreed  that  Cuba  should  be 
asked  to  consent  that  the  United  States  might  intervene 
to  preserve  the  independence  of  Cuba  and  good  order  and 
freedom  throughout  the  new  republic.  At  the  last  I 
ventured  to  say  that  if  conditions  were  formulated  and 
proposed  by  Congress  we  ought  to  add  that  Cuba  should 
issue  to  the  United  States  one  hundred  millions  of  four  per 
cent,  fifty-year  bonds  as  a  partial  compensation  for  the 
expenses  of  our  war  to  liberate  the  island  from  bondage  to 
Spain.  Mr.  Spooner  promptly  objected  and  said  that  it 
would  not  do  for  us  to  demand  money  from  Cuba  as  the 
price  of  our  services  in  giving  to  her  freedom.  I  assented 
to  the  idea  that  we  might  not  insist  upon  the  reimbursement 
but  said  that  I  thought  that  as  Cuba  would  give  careful 
consideration  to  all  our  requests,  it  might  be  well  to  suggest 
to  her  people  the  absolute  justice  of  a  money  payment.  Is 
it  not  good  policy  in  formulating  our  proposition  to  include 
something  which,  although  just  and  fair,  may  be  sur 
rendered  if  objection  is  made  to  our  plan  as  a  whole?  But 
Mr.  Spooner,  with  his  unsophistical  nature,  failed  to  com 
prehend  these  tactics  and  did  not  consent  to  them. 

No  plan  at  this  conference  was  placed  upon  paper. 
The  general  feeling  was  that  it  would  be  difficult  to  secure 
action  by  Congress  and  that  the  Democratic  members  of 
the  Committee  would  probably  oppose  and  delay  and  thus 
defeat  any  plan  which  we  might  offer  to  them. 

There  was  further  informal  talk  among  members  of 
the  Committee,  and  Mr.  Platt  was  in  daily  conference 
with  the  President  and  the  Secretary  of  War.  It  was 
finally  determined  that  as  an  independent  measure 
would  stand  little  chance  of  enactment  in  the  few  days 
remaining  of  the  session,  it  would  be  necessary  to  attach 
the  legislation  to  one  of  the  great  Appropriation  bills 
in  order  to  insure  action  before  the  4th  of  March. 


The  Platt  Amendment  341 

There  was  considerable  apprehension  in  regard  to  the 
attitude  of  the  Democratic  members  of  the  Committee. 
Were  they  to  show  a  disposition  to  play  for  political 
position  they  could  easily  at  that  stage  of  the  proceed 
ings  by  dilatory  tactics  prevent  action  before  the  4th  of 
March  and  thus  force  an  extraordinary  session  of  Con 
gress  to  the  embarrassment  of  the  majority  leaders  and 
of  the  administration.  Greatly  to  the  relief  of  Senator 
Platt  and  other  Republicans,  an  intimation  came,  at 
the  critical  moment,  from  the  minority  members  of  the 
Committee  that  no  serious  opposition  would  be  offered 
to  the  proposed  measure.  This  patriotic  attitude  of 
Senators  Teller,  Money,  Butler,  and  Taliaferro,  was  fre 
quently  referred  to  gratefully  by  Senator  Platt  in  later 
years. 

The  final  drafting  of  the  resolution  as  is  usually  the 
case  in  the  work  of  a  legislative  committee  was  left  in 
the  hands  of  the  chairman,  and  Senator  Platt  in  con 
sultation  with  that  master  of  parliamentary  phrase 
ology,  Senator  Spooner,  prepared  the  Amendment  as  it 
now  stands. 

When  the  measure  had  been  given  its  lasting  form 
by  Platt  and  Spooner,  a  formal  meeting  of  the  Cuban 
Relations  Committee  was  called,  and,  by  resolution  of 
the  Committee  adopted  on  February  25th.  Senator 
Platt  on  the  same  day  submitted  the  following  amend 
ment  to  the  Army  Appropriation  bill : 

That  in  fulfilment  of  the  declaration  contained  in  the 
joint  resolution  approved  April  20,  1898,  entitled:  "For 
the  recognition  of  the  independence  of  the  people  of  Cuba, 
demanding  that  the  government  of  Spain  relinquish  its 
authority  and  government  in  the  island  of  Cuba,  and 
withdraw  its  land  and  naval  forces  from  Cuba  and  Cuban 
waters,  and  directing  the  President  of  the  United  States 


342  Orville  H.  Platt 

to  use  the  land  and  naval  forces  of  the  United  States  to 
carry  these  resolutions  into  effect,"  the  President  is  hereby 
authorized  to  "leave  the  government  and  control  of  the 
island  of  Cuba  to  its  people"  so  soon  as  a  government  shall 
have  been  established  in  said  island  under  a  constitution 
which,  either  as  a  part  thereof  or  in  an  ordinance  appended 
thereto,  shall  define  the  future  relations  of  the  United  States 
with  Cuba,  substantially  as  follows: 

I. 

That  the  government  of  Cuba  shall  never  enter  into  any 
treaty  or  other  compact  with  any  foreign  power  or  powers 
which  will  impair  or  tend  to  impair  the  independence  of 
Cuba,  nor  in  any  manner  authorize  or  permit  any  foreign 
power  or  powers  to  obtain  by  colonization  or  for  military 
or  naval  purposes  or  otherwise,  lodgment  in  nor  control 
over  any  portion  of  said  island. 

ii. 

That  said  government  shall  not  assume  or  contract  any 
public  debt,  to  pay  the  interest  upon  which,  and  to  make 
reasonable  sinking  fund  provision  for  the  ultimate  discharge 
of  which,  the  ordinary  revenues  of  the  island,  after  defray 
ing  the  current  expenses  of  government  shall  be  inadequate. 

in. 

That  the  government  of  Cuba  consents  that  the  United 
States  may  exercise  the  right  to  intervene  for  the  preserva 
tion  of  Cuban  independence,  the  maintenance  of  a  govern 
ment  adequate  for  the  protection  of  life,  property  and 
individual  liberty,  and  for  discharging  the  obligations  with 
respect  to  Cuba  imposed  by  the  treaty  of  Paris  on  the  United 
States,  now  to  be  assumed  and  undertaken  by  the  govern 
ment  of  Cuba. 


The  Platt  Amendment  343 


IV. 

That  all  acts  of  the  United  States  in  Cuba  during  its 
military  occupancy  thereof  are  ratified  and  validated,  and 
all  lawful  rights  acquired  thereunder  shall  be  maintained 
and  protected. 

v. 

That  the  government  of  Cuba  will  execute,  and  as  far 
as  necessary  extend,  the  plans  already  devised  or  other 
plans  to  be  mutually  agreed  upon  for  the  sanitation  of 
the  cities  of  the  island,  to  the  end  that  a  recurrence  of 
epidemic  and  infectious  diseases  may  be  prevented,  thereby 
assuring  protection  to  the  people  and  commerce  of  Cuba, 
as  well  as  to  the  commerce  of  the  southern  ports  of  the 
United  States  and  the  people  residing  therein. 

VI. 

That  the  Isle  of  Pines  shall  be  omitted  from  the  pro 
posed  constitutional  boundaries  of  Cuba,  the  title  thereto 
being  left  to  future  adjustment  by  treaty. 

VII. 

That  to  enable  the  United  States  to  maintain  the  in 
dependence  of  Cuba,  and  to  protect  the  people  thereof,  as 
well  as  for  its  own  defence,  the  government  of  Cuba  will 
sell  or  lease  to  the  United  States  lands  necessary  for 
coaling  or  naval  stations  at  certain  specified  points,  to  be 
agreed  upon  with  the  President  of  the  United  States. 

VIII. 

That  by  way  of  further  assurance  the  government  of 
Cuba  will  embody  the  foregoing  provisions  in  a  permanent 
treaty  with  the  United  States. 

The  Amendment  was  adopted  on  February  27th,  by 
a  vote  of  43  to  20 — a  strict  party  division.  There  was 


344  Orville  H.  Platt 

hardly  a  word  of  debate  on  the  floor  of  the  Senate, 
members  of  the  Committee  purposely  refraining  from 
speech,  on  account  of  the  necessity  for  speedy  action  at 
that  late  hour  in  the  session,  while  the  minority  with  a 
few  exceptions  were  content  to  confine  their  opposition 
to  the  recording  of  their  votes,  although  had  the  Amend 
ment  been  offered  as  a  separate  measure  it  would  prob 
ably  never  have  reached  a  vote.  The  House  accepted 
the  Amendment  promptly,  and  on  March  2d  it  became 
a  law. 

The  Cuban  Convention  was  in  no  hurry  to  incorporate 
the  terms  of  the  Amendment  in  the  constitution  which 
was  in  process  of  construction.  Many  of  its  members 
suspected  the  motives  of  the  United  States.  The 
question  arose  as  to  whether  the  adoption  of  the  Amend 
ment  would  leave  Cuba  an  independent  state ;  whether 
the  third  clause  did  not  in  effect  establish  a  protectorate 
or  suzerainty  on  the  part  of  the  United  States.  In  April 
a  Committee  of  Delegates  appeared  in  Washington  to 
lay  these  doubts  before  the  Secretary  of  War  and  to  find 
out  whether  in  the  event  of  Cuba's  compliance  she 
could  expect  reciprocal  trade  relations  with  the  United 
States.  As  to  the  question  regarding  independence 
Secretary  Root  consulted  with  Senator  Platt  who  replied 
as  follows : 

The  Amendment  was  carefully  drafted  with  a  view  to 
avoid  any  possible  claim  that  its  acceptance  by  the  Cuban 
Constitutional  Convention  would  result  in  the  establishment 
of  a  protectorate  or  suzerainty,  or  in  any  way  interfere 
with  the  independence  of  Cuba,  and  speaking  for  myself, 
it  seems  impossible  that  any  such  construction  can  be 
placed  upon  that  clause.  I  think  the  Amendment  must 
be  considered  as  a  whole,  and  it  must  be  evident  upon  its 
reading  that  its  well-defined  purpose  is  to  secure  and  safe- 


The  Platt  Amendment  345 

guard  Cuban  independence  and  to  establish  at  the  outset  a 
definite  understanding  of  the  friendly  disposition  of  the 
United  States  towards  the  Cuban  people,  and  its  expressed 
intention  to  assist  them,  if  necessary,  in  the  maintenance  of 
such  independence. 

These  are  my  views,  and  though,  as  you  suggest,  I  can 
not  speak  for  the  whole  Congress,  my  belief  is  that  such 
purpose  was  well  understood  by  that  body.1 

i  In  an  article  which  appeared  in  the  World's  Work  for  May,  1901, 
only  a  few  weeks  after  the  adjournment  of  Congress  and  a  little 
while  before  the  Cuban  Constitutional  Convention  had  concluded 
its  work  and  accepted  the  terms  of  the  United  States,  Senator  Platt 
thus  stated  the  case: 

"Two  solutions  only  are  possible.  One,  the  annexation  of  the 
island  by  the  United  States;  the  other,  the  establishment  of  an 
independent  republic  there  in  which  the  vital  and  just  interests 
both  of  Cuba  and  the  United  States  shall  be  denned  and  main 
tained. 

"The  project  of  annexation  may,  and  ought  to  be,  dismissed. 
It  should  not  for  a  moment  be  considered  except  in  case  of  the 
direst  necessity.  The  people  of  Cuba,  by  reason  of  race  and  char 
acteristics,  cannot  be  easily  assimilated  by  us.  In  these  respects 
they  have  little  in  common  with  us.  Their  presence  in  the  Ameri 
can  union,  as  a  state,  would  be  most  disturbing,  and  we  have 
already  asserted,  as  the  deliberate  conclusion  of  Congress,  that  they 
ought  to  be  free  and  independent.  There  is  nothing  to  be  gained, 
much,  even  honor,  to  be  lost,  by  the  annexation  of  Cuba. 

"The  real  question,  then,  is,  how  can  an  independent  republic 
be  established  there  under  conditions  and  circumstances  which 
shall  best  subserve  the  interests  of  the  people  both  of  Cuba  and  of 
the  United  States?  That  our  people  have  interests  in  Cuba  which 
must  be  subserved  and  protected,  goes  without  saying.  We 
can  not,  and  will  not,  permit  any  European  Power,  much  less  a 
hostile  or  unfriendly  Power,  to  acquire  rights  or  privileges  in  Cuba 
to  our  disadvantage.  The  essence  of  the  Monroe  Doctrine  asserted, 
and  justly  insisted  upon  for  nearly  eighty  years,  forbids  it.  Nor 
can  the  United  States  permit  the  existence  of  a  government  in 
Cuba  in  which  peace  and  order,  the  protection  of  life  and  property, 
and  the  maintenance  of  all  international  obligations  are  not  ob 
served.  In  respect  to  the  future  government  of  Cuba  our  interests 
and  those  of  the  Cuban  people  are  identical;  the  government  of 
Cuba  must  be  stable,  as  well  as  republican  in  form.  Again,  lour 


346  Orville  H.  Platt 

Sufficient  assurances  were  also  given  in  regard  to 
reciprocity,  and  finally  after  much  backing  and  filling 
the  convention  in  June  accepted  the  terms  in  such  form 
as  to  satisfy  the  administration.  In  writing  to  a  mem 
ber  of  the  Convention,  while  the  acceptance  was  still 

obligations  to  the  world  at  large,  created  and  assumed  by  the  act 
of  intervention,  demand  of  us  that  we  become  responsible  both  for 
the  character  and  maintenance  of  the  new  government.  If  duty 
required  us  to  see  to  it  that  Cuba  was  free,  duty  equally  requires 
us  to  see  to  it  that  the  Cuba  of  the  future  shall  be  both  peaceful 
and  prosperous.  .  .  . 

"We  cannot,  if  we  would,  honorably  relieve  ourselves  from  our 
treaty  obligations  to  see  that  the  life  and  property  of  Spaniards 
and  those  Cubans  who  did  not  join  in  the  revolution  are  protected 
by  the  new  government.  Perfunctory  advice  to  that  government 
will  not  meet  the  full  measure  of  our  obligation.  Our  work  was 
only  half  done  when  Cuba  was  liberated  from  its  oppressor.  A 
nation  which  undertakes  to  put  an  end  to  bad  government  in  a 
neighboring  country  must  also  see  that  just  and  good  government 
follows.  Nations  have  duties  to  perform  as  well  as  interests  to 
guard  and  protect,  a  truth  which  it  is  encouraging  to  note  is  being 
better  understood  throughout  the  world  now  than  ever  before. 
From  the  high  plane  of  duty  alone,  not  less  than  by  self-interest, 
the  United  States  is  committed  to  the  maintenance  of  good  govern 
ment  in  Cuba,  and  its  policy  must  first  of  all  be  determined  by 
this  consideration.  It  can  not  escape  responsibility;  it  must  meet 
it  manfully.  .  .  . 

"The  conditions  thus  proposed  by  Congress  are  as  manifestly 
in  the  interest  of  Cuba  as  of  the  United  States.  The  keynote  of 
these  propositions  is  that  Cuba  shall  be  and  remain  independent 
under  a  stable  republican  government  which  the  United  States  will 
assist  in  maintaining  against  foreign  aggression  or  domestic  dis 
order.  Cuba  needs  this,  because  it  will  be  practically  powerless 
either  to  repel  foreign  aggression  or  to  maintain  peace  and  ordet 
at  home  if  the  turbulence  of  the  past  shall  reappear. 

"The  new  government  of  Cuba  will  have  neither  an  army  not 
a  navy.  There  are  something  like  six  millions  of  dollars  of  Spanish 
bonds  outstanding,  for  which  the  revenues  of  Cuba  were  pledged 
at  the  time  of  their  issue.  These  bonds  are  held  largely  in  Germany 
and  France.  It  is  entirely  probable  that  Cuba  being  left  without 
any  means  of  defence,  these  governments  on  behalf  of  their  citizens 
would  demand  and  endeavor  to  enforce  their  assumption.  Cuba's 


The  Platt  Amendment  347 

pending,  Senator  Platt  thus  expressed  himself  on  the 
question  of  independence: 

I  cannot  help  thinking  that  there  has  been  some  mis 
understanding  about  the  purpose  of  my  Amendment.  It 
seemed  to  me  impossible  that  it  could  be  taken  as  limiting 
Cuban  independence.  The  preamble  declares  that  it  is 
to  carry  out  the  so-called  Teller  resolution.  It  recognizes 
Cuban  independence  in  terms  in  three  of  the  clauses  and 
indirectly,  in  the  other  four.  In  two  of  the  clauses  it 
speaks  of  treaties  to  be  made,  and  we  certainly  make  treaties 
only  with  independent  governments.  The  clause  relating 

only  guarantee  against  this  will  be  the  fact  that  any  nation  at 
tempting  to  compel  it  to  pay  this  indebtedness  will  understand 
that  it  has  the  United  States  to  deal  with.  Between  revolutionists 
and  Spaniards  and  Cubans  who  were  loyal  to  Spain  there  is  little 
love.  With  no  army  to  repress  disorder,  it  is  certainly  within  the 
limit  of  reasonable  probability  that  the  revolutionary  and  turbu 
lent  party  may  attempt  the  destruction  or  confiscation  of  Spanish 
and  Cuban  property  which  the  new  government  would  be  utterly 
powerless  to  prevent.  We  most  certainly  owe  a  duty  to  our  own 
citizens  in  Cuba  that  they  shall  be  protected  in  the  enjoyment 
of  their  property  and  kept  free  from  the  dangers  which  attend 
revolutionary  uprisings.  Indeed,  any  one  who  knows  public 
sentiment  in  Cuba  is  aware  that  it  is  expected  by  Cuban  people 
that  if  difficulty,  either  foreign  or  domestic,  shall  arise,  the  United 
§tates  will  be  called  upon  to  meet  it.  Even  those  who  insist  that 
nothing  should  be  put  into  the  Constitution  recognizing  our  right 
to  do  so,  say  that  the  United  States  will  do  it  as  a  matter  of  course. 
.  .  .  The  United  States  needs  this  mutual  arrangement  because, 
for  its  own  defence,  it  cannot  permit  any  foreign  power  to  dominate, 
control,  or  obtain  a  foothold  in  this  hemisphere  or  its  adjacent 
territory,  and  cannot  tolerate  such  revolutions  or  disorders  upon 
an  island  so  near  our  coast,  as  frequently  occur  in  southern  American 
republics;  more  than  all,  because  it  stands  pledged  in  honor  to  its 
own  citizens,  to  the  citizens  of  Cuba,  and  to  all  the  world  to  main 
tain  quiet  and  peace  and  good  government  in  Cuba.  In  a  word, 
Cuba  needs  self-government,  peace,  tranquillity  and  prosperity. 
The  United  States  asks  for  nothing  more  than  this,  but  it  recog 
nizes  its  obligation  and  insists  upon  its  right  to  see  that  such 
results  are  to  be  permanently  secured." 


348  Orville  H.  Platt 

to  sanitation  involves  an  agreement  between  two  equally 
independent  powers,  and  the  ratification  of  the  acts  of  the 
military  government  can  only  be  by  an  independent  power. 
So  each  clause  of  the  resolution  is  based  upon  the  idea 
not  only  that  Cuba  was  to  be  independent  but  that  the 
United  States  recognized  that  fact.  All  that  we  ask  is  that 
Cuba  shall  assent  to  our  right  to  help  her  maintain  her 
independence  and  to  protect  our  own  interests.  Of  course 
we  can  only  determine  treaty  relations  with  an  independent 
and  fully  established  government.  The  very  first  step 
at  reciprocal  trade  relations  is  the  establishment  of  the 
Cuban  government.  No  one  man  can  speak  for  the  future 
action  of  his  nation,  but  I  can  say  this  that  I  find  in  the 
United  States  but  one  sentiment  and  that  is  that  as  soon 
as  Cuba  shall  have  put  herself  in  the  proper  position  to 
make  a  commercial  treaty  there  will  be  every  disposition 
to  agree  to  trade  relations  which  shall  be  for  the  benefit  of 
both  countries.  There  may  be  different  ideas  as  to  the 
precise  terms  of  such  a  treaty,  both  here  and  in  Cuba,  but 
that  we  will  strive  for  the  same  end,  namely  trade  relations 
which  shall  be  for  the  advantage  of  both  nations,  I  cannot 
for  a  moment  doubt.  I  have  felt  that  the  Cuban  people 
have  seen  and  understood  this  all  the  while. 

To  an  American  resident  of  Cuba,  he  had  this  to  say : 

Personally,  I  was  in  favor  of  very  much  more  stringent 
measures  requiring  much  more  as  to  our  future  relations, 
but  in  legislation  you  have  got  to  consider  the  preponder 
ance  of  public  sentiment.  As  you  say,  it  is  difficult  enough 
to  bring  those  Cuban  delegates  to  an  acceptance  of  the 
terms  we  propose.  If  we  had  proposed  more  stringent 
terms,  we  should  not  only  have  had  that  difficulty  vastly 
increased  but  we  should  have  had  a  party  in  the  United 
States  and  in  Congress  giving  aid  and  comfort  to  the  Cuban 
radicals.  My  own  judgment  is  that  when  they  conceded 
to  us  the  right  of  intervention  and  naval  stations,  as  set 
forth  in  the  Amendment,  the  United  States  gets  an  effective 


The  Platt  Amendment  349 

and  moral  position  which  may  become  something  more 
than  a  moral  position  and  which  will  prevent  trouble  there. 
It  is  easy  to  say  that  we  ought  to  insist  on  more,  it  was  im 
possible  to  pass  through  Congress  anything  more  drastic 
than  we  did.  It  is  a  mistake,  if  I  may  say  so,  for  the  people 
of  Cuba  who  are  conservative  and  who  have  property  in 
terests  to  be  cared  for  to  refuse  to  exert  their  influence  to 
make  the  new  government  of  Cuba  what  it  ought  to  be.  I 
think  I  recognize  all  the  difficulties  of  the  situation,  but  it 
does  seem  to  me  that  the  able,  forceful,  and  conservative 
men  of  Cuba  must  do  something  to  help  themselves  and 
I  think  they  will  finally  see  this.  At  any  rate,  the  United 
States  will  always,  under  the  so-called  Platt  Amendment, 
be  in  a  position  to  straighten  out  things  if  they  get  seriously 
bad.  I  see  nothing  for  it  except  to  try  the  experiment  of 
an  independent  republican  government  in  Cuba,  and,  while 
I  see  the  dangers,  I  think  we  may  hope  some  day  that  the 
experiment  will  be  fairly  successful.1 

At  the  time  of  its  adoption  it  was  recognized  generally 
that  Senator  Platt  had  been  the  principal  force  in 
Congress  behind  the  Amendment,  which  naturally 
became  identified  with  his  name,  but  long  after  its 
enactment  and  when  it  had  become  recognized  as  one 
of  the  epoch-making  documents  of  the  country's  history 
the  question  was  raised  as  to  its  real  authorship.  This 
question  is  bound  to  arise  always  in  cases  where  more 
than  one  person  is  entrusted  with  the  formulation  of 
papers  embodying  a  general  determination.  In  the 
Review  of  Reviews  for  January,  1903,  appeared  a 
laudatory  article  by  Walter  Wellman  on  the  work  of 
Secretary  Root  in  the  Cabinet  in  which  occurred  the 
following  passage: 

The  solution  of  the  relations  of  the  United  States  to  the 
new  nation — a  solution  which  not  only  assured  that  a  Cuban 

1  Letter  to  E.  F.  Atkins,  June  n,  1901. 


350  Orville  H.  Platt 

republic  should  come  into  being,  but  that  it  should  be  pre 
served  under  the  sheltering  wing  of  the  great  American 
eagle;  a  solution  so  statesmanlike,  so  obviously  a  work  of 
the  highest  genius,  that  it  must  long  serve  as  a  model — was 
embodied  in  what  is  known  as  the  Platt  Amendment.  Well, 
Mr.  Root  was  the  author  of  the  Platt  Amendment.  He 
wrote  it,  almost  verbatim  as  it  stands  to-day,  in  a  letter  of 
instructions  to  General  Wood  for  that  officer's  guidance 
in  dealing  with  the  Cuban  Constitutional  Convention.  It 
was  afterward  submitted  to  the  Senate  Committee  on  Cuba, 
of  which  that  really  great  Senator,  Mr.  Platt  of  Connecticut, 
is  Chairman,  and,  after  slight  modification,  was  placed  upon 
the  statutes  by  Congress,  and  ratified  in  the  constitution 
of  the  new  republic.  Thus  Mr.  Root  not  only  created, 
formed,  moulded,  trained,  nursed,  shaped  the  Cuban  nation, 
but  wrote  with  his  own  hand  its  Magna  Charta. 

This  paragraph  was  widely  copied  and  aroused  con 
siderable  discussion.  In  commenting  on  it  a  friendly 
writer  in  the  Hartford  C  our  ant  said : 

Our  Mr.  Platt  no  doubt  could  have  written  the  Platt 
Amendment  had  it  been  necessary;  but  he  also  apparently 
was  a  strong  man  to  know  the  right  thing,  and  to  back  it 
up  by  his  parliamentary  skill,  when  he  found  that  another 
hand  had  already  substantially  turned  the  right  provisions 
into  words.  An  amendment  written  by  Secretary  Root 
and  passed  into  law  by  Orville  H.  Platt  ought  to  be  as 
nearly  the  proper  and  safe  thing  as  human  legislation  can 
be. 

It  was  not  Senator  Platt 's  custom  to  make  use  of  the 
newspapers  to  advance  his  own  claims  for  political 
credit,  and  he  did  not  enter  a  controversy  even  when 
there  was  a  possibility  of  his  being  deprived  of  the  tiny 
meed  of  credit  which  had  come  to  him  after  a  genera 
tion  of  great  public  service  almost  devoid  of  general 


The  Platt  Amendment  351 

public  recognition.  He  could  not  let  the  statement  in 
Mr.  Wellman's  article  go  entirely  unchallenged,  how 
ever,  among  his  friends,  and  when  he  saw  this  reference 
in  his  own  home  paper  he  wrote  to  Charles  Hopkins 
Clark,  the  editor,  a  personal  friend  of  many  years' 
standing : 

January  i,  1904. 

MY  DEAR  MR.  CLARK  : 

Referring  to  the  Courant  of  December  3ist,  and  the 
reviews  of  magazine  articles,  I  find  that  Walter  Wellman 
thinks  that  Secretary  Root  wrote  with  his  own  hand  what 
is  known  as  the  "  Platt  Amendment,"  and  that  after  quoting 
Mr.  Wellman  your  book-review  man  thinks  that  I  could 
have  written  it  if  it  had  been  necessary,  etc. 

It  is  not  a  matter  that  I  care  enough  about  to  make  any 
issue  of  it,  but  Mr.  Wellman  is  a  little  off.  The  letter  of 
instructions  to  General  Wood  was  written  by  Secretary 
Root  after  the  Platt  Amendment  had  been  much  considered 
by  the  Republican  members  of  the  Cuban  Committee.  The 
original  draft  was  my  own,  and  contained  substantially  the 
terms  on  which  the  withdrawal  of  American  forces  was  to 
take  place,  as  shown  in  the  instructions  to  Wood.  It  was 
changed  from  time  to  time,  somewhat  in  language  but  not 
in  spirit,  in  consultations  both  with  the  Republicans  of  the 
Committee,  President  McKinley,  and  Secretary  Root.  A 
final  consultation  between  myself  and  Senator  Spooner  put 
the  document  in  its  complete  form. 

I  make  this  statement,  not  for  publication,  but  simply 
for  your  own  information. 

Very  truly  yours, 

O.  H.  PLATT. 

Mr.  Clark  felt  that  the  information  contained  in  this 
letter  should  be  made  public  and  accordingly  he  wrote 
to  ask  permission  to  print  it  in  such  a  way  that  Senator 
Platt 's  connection  with  the  publication  would  not  be 


352  Orville  H.  Platt 

known.  It  is  related  that  when  this  request  came  in  the 
mail,  the  Senator's  secretary,  who  had  seen  the  original 
draft  of  the  Amendment  in  the  Senator's  own  hand 
writing  in  pencil  with  occasional  interlineations,  asked, 
4 'Why  not  permit  Mr.  Clark  or  some  one  to  tell  the 
truth  about  this?"  He  looked  up  quickly  and  replied 
seriously  and  with  emphasis : 

What  difference  does  it  make  who  wrote  the  Platt  Amend 
ment  so  long  as  it  serves  the  purpose  intended  ?  Just  let  us 
be  quiet ;  it  will  all  blow  over  and  there  will  be  nothing 
about  it  in  a  week. 

Then  he  dictated  a  dispatch  telling  Mr.  Clark  on  no 
account  to  publish  anything  concerning  him  in  regard 
to  the  Platt  Amendment,  and  followed  it  up  with  a 
letter  in  which  he  said : 

I  do  not  wish  to  get  into  the  newspapers  about  the  maga 
zine  article  written  by  Wellman.  I  cannot  do  it  now  any 
way,  because  a  statement  of  my  connection  with  the  Platt 
Amendment  would  need  to  be  carefully  made  from  dates  and 
documents,  and  I  have  no  time  for  it  at  present.  I  may 
some  day  do  it  for  my  own  satisfaction,  but,  above  all  things , 
I  do  not  want  any  newspaper  or  magazine  exploitation 
of  it,  which  would  do  me  no  good,  and  by  this  time  the  whole 
matter  has  been  forgotten,  so  please  do  not  say  anything 
about  it  in  the  Courant.  Some  time  I  will  tell  you  the  whole 
story. 

John  H.  Flagg  wrote  him : 

I  have  read  Walter  Wellman 's  article  on  Root  in  the 
current  number  of  the  Review  of  Reviews,  wherein  he  states 
unqualifiedly  that  Root  and  not  you  was  the  author  of  the 
so-called  "Platt  Amendment."  Is  this  statement  true? 
I  as  well  as  your  countless  friends  had  taken  peculiar  satis 
faction  in  believing  you  to  have  been  its  author,  and  I  have 
never  seen  any  other  claim  asserted  until  now. 


The  Platt  Amendment  353 

In  the  course  of  his  reply  to  this  letter  Senator  Platt 
said: 

It  (the  Platt  Amendment)  started  with  an  original 
draft  of  four  propositions  by  me,  submitted  to  President 
McKinley  and  Secretary  Root.  It  was  the  subject  of  many 
conversations  with  Mr.  Root,  and  many  consultations  be 
tween  the  Republican  members  of  the  Senate  Committee. 
Its  final  draft  was  the  work  of  myself  and  Senator  Spooner. 
While  these  consultations  were  going  on,  Secretary  Root 
gave  the  order  to  General  Wood,  stating  what  the  President 
insisted  upon,  and  that  is  all  there  is  to  it.  The  meat  of 
the  whole  thing  was  in  my  original  propositions,  long  an 
terior  to  the  issuance  of  the  order. 

The  propositions  referred  to  are  probably  the 
following,  which  are  found  in  typewritten  form  among 
Mr.  Platt's  papers,  with  the  pencilled  memorandum  at 
the  head,  in  his  own  hand:  "Proposition  submitted  to 
the  President  by  me": 

Provisions  which  should  be  incorporated  in  the  Cuban 
constitution: 

I. 

Ratification  of  the  acts  of  the  government  of  military 
occupation,  and  the  protection  of  interests  acquired  there 
under. 


ii. 


The  right  of  intervention  to  maintain  the  independence 
of  Cuba,  for  the  protection  of  life  and  property  therein,  its 
permanent  pacification,  and  the  stability  of  its  government. 


in. 


Naval  stations,  and  a  force  necessary  for  their  main 
tenance. 


354  Orville  H.  Platt 

IV. 

Supervision  of  treaties  with  foreign  powers. 

v. 
Supervision  of  the  bonded  debt  of  the  island. 

It  may  be  set  down  as  an  established  historical  fact 
then  that  the  Platt  Amendment  was  really  what  it 
purported  to  be — the  work  of  O.  H.  Platt.1  It  was  he 
who  foresaw  the  imperative  need  of  some  declaration 
by  Congress;  it  was  he  who  at  the  very  beginning  of 
consultation  suggested  the  general  lines  to  be  followed 
in  the  declaration;  he  had  a  chief  share  in  fixing  its 

1  At  different  stages  of  the  consultations  various  members  of 
the  Committee  submitted  suggestions  and  tentative  drafts.  One 
suggestion  by  Senator  Platt,  which  he  called  "Preliminary,"  and 
which  was  to  be  proposed  by  him  as  an  amendment  to  the  Army 
Appropriation  bill,  reads  as  follows: 

Amendment  intended  to  be  proposed  by  Mr.  Platt  (Connecticut), 
to  the  bill  H.  R.  14017,  making  appropriation  for  the  support  of 
the  army  for  the  fiscal  year  ending  June  30,  1902. 

That  the  United  States  hereby  declares  its  purpose  to  withdraw 
its  military  occupation  of  Cuba  whenever  a  government  shall  have 
been  established  under  a  constitution  which,  being  in  other  respects 
acceptable,  shall  contain  provisions  by  which  the  following  enu 
merated  rights  shall  be  secured  to  the  United  States,  and  such 
government  shall  have  been  recognized  as  an  independent  govern 
ment  by  the  President : 

First,  to  maintain  troops  in  said  island  for  a  period  not  exceeding 
ten  years,  for  the  purpose  of  assuring  its  complete  and  continued 
pacification,  and  the  maintenance  of  its  obligations,  domestic  and 
international. 

Second,  the  right  of  the  United  States  to  maintain  two  coaling 
and  naval  stations  in  said  island. 

Third,  provisions  which  limit  the  right  of  the  Government  of 
Cuba  to  incur  bonded  debt  or  obligations  without  the  consent  of 
the  United  States. 

Fourth,  provisions  to  the  effect  that  treaties  with  foreign  nations 
shall  only  be  made  by  the  Government  of  Cuba  with  the  assent 


The  Platt  Amendment  355 

lasting  form;  moreover,  its  smooth  passage  through 
the  Senate  was  the  result  in  no  small  degree  of  the  gen 
eral  confidence  in  his  integrity  and  statesmanship.  It 

of  the  United  States,  and  that  simultaneously  with  the  recognition 
of  the  independence  of  the  Government  of  Cuba  a  convention  pro 
viding  for  the  commercial  and  other  relations  to  subsist  between  said 
Government  of  Cuba  and  the  Government  of  the  United  States, 
acceptable  to  the  President  of  the  United  States,  shall  be  entered 
into  and  executed. 

Senator  Chandler  made  a  draft  of  an  amendment  to  be  proposed 
to  the  Naval  Appropriation  bill  as  follows: 

That  the  naval  and  military  forces  of  the  United  States  shall  be 
removed  from  the  waters  and  harbors  of  the  island  of  Cuba  when 
ever,  as  a  result  of  a  fair  and  peaceful  election,  a  national  govern 
ment  shall  be  established  under  a  republican  constitution  and 
certain  rights  of  the  United  States  shall  be  secured  either  under  such 
Cuban  constitution  or  by  treaty  with  the  United  States,  taking 
effect  simultaneously  with  such  constitution,  namely : 


The  right  of  the  United  States  to  intervene  for  ten  years  for  the 
protection  of  Spaniards  in  Cuba  in  accordance  with  the  treaty 
between  the  United  States  and  Spain. 

ii. 

The  right  to  prevent  the  recognition  or  assumption  by  Cuba 
without  the  consent  of  the  United  States  of  any  indebtedness 
(except  to  Cuban  soldiers)  growing  out  of  transactions  prior  to 
the  relinquishment  of  Spanish  sovereignty  over  Cuba. 

in. 

The  right  to  have  and  hold  a  coaling  station  at  some  suitable 
harbor. 

IV. 

The  right  to  one  hundred  and  fifty  million  dollars  of  bonds  of 
the  Cuban  Government  payable  in  forty  years,  and  redeemable 
after  twenty  years,  bearing  interest  at  the  rate  of  four  per  cent. 

Senator  Cullom  proposed  the  following: 

And  the  President  is  authorized  to  recognize  the  independence 
of  the  republic  of  Cuba,  and  withdraw  the  troops  of  the  United 


356  Orville  H.  Platt 

does  not  detract  from  the  established  fame  of  Secretary 
Root  that  this  acknowledgment  should  be  made. 

States  therefrom  whenever  it  shall  appear  to  his  satisfaction  that 
the  inhabitants  of  that  island  have  established  and  are  prepared 
to  maintain  a  stable  government ;  and  whenever  such  government 
shall  by  treaty  recognize  and  acknowledge  the  right  and  authority 
of  the  United  States  to  intervene  by  armed  forces  or  otherwise 
for  the  preservation  of  peace  and  the  protection  of  the  property 
of  citizens  of  the  United  States  and  foreigners  in  the  island  of  Cuba ; 
to  preserve  the  financial  credit  of  said  government;  to  protect  the 
commercial  interests  of  the  United  States;  and  shall  leave  per 
petually  two  safe  and  convenient  harbors,  one  near  the  eastern 
and  one  near  the  western  limits  of  said  island,  with  sufficient  land 
for  repair  and  supply  stations  for  the  navy  of  the  United  States, 
such  harbors  to  be  selected  under  the  direction  of  the  Secretary 
of  the  Navy;  and  whenever  the  republic  of  Cuba  shall  by  treaty 
agree  to  submit  for  the  ratification  of  the  Senate  of  the  United 
States  all  treaties,  protocols,  and  other  agreements  touching  its 
relations  with  other  governments  than  the  United  States. 


CHAPTER  XXVII 

THE  PORTO-RICAN  TARIFF 

Our  "  Plain  Duty  "  toward  Porto  Rico — Organizes  Opposition  to 

Free    Trade   with   the   Island — A    Successful    Parliamentary 

Campaign — Letter  to  Lyman  Abbott. 

ON  the  conclusion  of  the  war  with  Spain,  with  our 
assumption  of  strange  territorial  responsibilities, 
Senator  Platt  as  a  protectionist  was  up  against  a  new 
problem.  The  first  important  question  to  be  settled 
with  reference  to  Cuba,  Porto  Rico,  and  the  Philippines 
was  how  far  it  would  be  practicable  for  them  to  merge 
with  us  commercially,  what  obligations  we  owed  them 
which  could  be  satisfied  without  injustice  to  our  own 
people.  Mr.  Platt  had  been  a  staunch  advocate  of 
expansion.  There  was  never  a  time  after  the  beginning 
of  hostilities  when  he  did  not  hold  that  Porto  Rico  and 
the  Philippines  must  become  possessions  of  the  United 
States;  but  he  was  no  less  a  friend  to  protection  of 
American  industries  than  to  expansion  of  American 
territory,  and  he  contended  that  our  insular  possessions, 
politically  and  commercially,  should  not  be  brought 
into  too  close  a  union  with  us. 

Porto  Rico  presented  the  first  question  for  settle 
ment.  The  long  period  of  suspense  accompanying  the 
change  in  political  control  had  left  the  island  in  a  bad 
way.  She  had  lost  the  advantage  which  she  formerly 
had  in  her  two  principal  markets.  Spanish  and  Cuban 

357 


358  Orville  H.  Platt 

ports,  hitherto  open,  were  now  closed  to  her  products 
except  upon  equal  terms  with  the  rest  of  the  world, 
while  she  had  not  yet  found  her  way  into  the  markets 
of  the  United  States.  A  hurricane  which  swept  over 
the  island  in  August,  1899,  had  left  100,000  people 
homeless.  Many  faced  starvation.  It  was  imperative 
that  the  United  States  establish  civil  authority  there 
as  quickly  as  possible  and  take  immediate  steps  for  the 
permanent  relief  of  the  distressed  inhabitants. 

At  the  beginning  of  the  Fifty-sixth  Congress  in  1899, 
President  McKinley,  swayed  by  feelings  of  humanity 
and  a  praiseworthy  desire  to  encourage  cordial  relations 
with  the  people  of  the  island,  incorporated  in  his  annual 
message  a  paragraph  recommending  the  establishment 
of  a  civil  government  and  declaring  it  to  be  our  "  plain 
duty  "  to  abolish  all  customs  tariffs  between  the  United 
States  and  Porto  Rico  and  give  the  island's  products 
free  access  to  our  markets.  It  was  a  taking  proposal, 
for  it  contained  two  telling  ingredients  of  popularity. 
It  appealed  to  the  generous  impulses  of  a  people  still 
glowing  with  enthusiasm  kindled  in  the  war  for  the 
emancipation  of  Cuba  and  it  accorded  with  the  pro 
gramme  of  those  who,  having  opposed  the  acquisition 
of  the  Philippines,  were  now  busily  engaged  in  arguing 
that  over  territory  once  acquired  the  provisions  of  the 
Constitution  extended  of  its  own  force.  Thus  it  met 
with  the  immediate  approval  of  the  great  majority  of 
the  press  and  of  the  people,  and  Congress  was  expected 
to  acquiesce  without  undue  delay.  Chairman  Payne 
of  the  Ways  and  Means  Committee  promptly  presented 
in  the  House  a  bill  to  carry  the  recommendation  into 
effect,  and  a  measure  was  likewise  introduced  in  the 
Senate.  It  seemed  ungracious  not  to  join  in  the 
advancement  of  so  philanthropic  a  purpose  and  yet 


The  Porto-Rican  Tariff  359 

there  were  a  few  who  could  not  see  their  way  to  do  it. 
Chief  among  these  was  Senator  Platt.  He  perceived 
at  once  in  the  proposal  a  menace  to  the  satisfactory 
adjustment  of  the  relations  between  the  United  States 
and  its  extra-territorial  possessions,  and  after  careful 
consideration  of  everything  at  stake  he  made  up  his 
mind  that  he  could  not  give  his  approval  to  the  Presi 
dent's  plan.  For  a  time  he  kept  his  own  counsel, 
but  when  he  went  home  to  Connecticut  during  the  holi 
day  recess,  and  thought  it  all  over  there  among  his  own 
people,  he  could  remain  quiet  no  longer.  On  December 
28th,  he  wrote  from  Meriden  to  Senator  Foraker,  who 
as  Chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Porto  Rico  and  the 
Pacific  Islands  would  have  most  to  do  with  the  pro 
jected  legislation,  a  letter  setting  out  the  conclusions 
at  which  he  had  arrived: 

I  am  much  distressed  by  the  recommendation  in  the  re 
port  of  the  Secretary  of  War  and  also  in  the  message  of  the 
President  to  the  effect  that  acts  should  be  passed  ad 
mitting  goods  from  Porto  Rico  into  our  ports  free  of  duty. 
I  cannot  but  think  ttiat  the  alleged  reason  for  the  necessity 
of  doing  so  does  not  exist.  The  principal  production  of 
Porto  Rico  is  coffee;  the  next  in  importance  are  tobacco 
and  sugar — fruits  are  of  but  little  importance.  The  ground 
upon  which  such  legislation  is  recommended  is  that  we  have 
destroyed  their  market  with  Spain,  and  we  ought  to  make 
good  by  giving  them  free  markets  here.  As  to  coffee,  it 
is  free  now.  As  to  sugar,  they  have  just  as  good  a  chance  as 
the  Cuban  planter  has,  and  so  far  as  extending  the  sugar  in 
dustry  in  Porto  Rico, by  giving  them  free  trade,  I  am  inclined 
to  think  that  would  amount  to  very  little;  for  if  I  under 
stand  the  character  of  their  lands,  sugar  can  only  be  raised 
to  a  limited  extent,  and  on  the  low  lands.  As  to  tobacco 
and  cigars,  if  they  were  made  free  there  would  be  no  particu 
lar  demand  for  them  in  the  United  States  either  now  or  at 


360  Orville  H.  Platt 

any  future  time,  unless  the  taste  for  Porto  Rico  tobacco 
could  be  cultivated,  so  that  I  think  the  supposed  prospec 
tive  advantage  to  the  island  has  been  greatly  exaggerated. 
The  political  effect  of  such  action  would  I  fear  be  very 
disastrous.  I  do  not  think  I  am  unduly  apprehensive.  We 
have  carried  our  elections  upon  the  policy  of  protection,  and 
we  have  held  our  voters  to  the  Republican  party  because  we 
made  them  think  we  were  honestly  in  favor  of  protection 
and  therefore  the  true  friend  of  the  American  laborer.  If 
we  by  act  of  Congress  admit  goods  free  from  Porto  Rico 
we  shall  not  only  affect  the  people  engaged  in  the  growing 
of  beet  sugar,  the  sugar  industry,  the  tobacco  growers  and 
cigar  manufacturers,  but  we  shall  be  charged  with  the 
abandonment  of  our  protective  principle.  That  principle 
we  have  always  asserted  was  that  we  proposed  to  protect 
our  laborers  against  the  competition  of  the  cheap  and 
ignorant  laborer.  The  whole  Chinese  question  turns  on 
that.  Now  if  we  let  goods  from  Porto  Rico  in  free,  we  put 
our  home  laborers  into  competition  with  the  cheapest  of 
cheap  labor.  I  already  hear  the  mutterings  of  the  coming 
storm.  It  will  be  useless  to  tell  a  mechanic  or  any  other 
kind  of  laborer  that  he  is  not  going  to  be  hurt  by  free 
goods  from  Porto  Rico ;  he  will  see  that  we  have  abandoned 
protection. 

Anti-expansion  has  gained  more  strength  from  the 
laboring  element  just  from  the  belief  that  free  goods 
were  to  be  admitted  from  our  new  possessions  than  from 
any  other  class  of  our  citizens,  and,  such  a  statute  once 
passed,  the  muttering  storm  as  it  sweeps  onward  will  ac 
quire  velocity  and  force,  and  we  shall  have  an  issue  in  the 
next  campaign  harder  to  meet  than  the  anti-expansion, 
the  anti-trust,  or  the  free-silver  issue.  We  have  been  so 
long  receiving  free  goods  from  our  Territories  that  there  is 
ground  for  the  idea  that  we  must  do  so  under  the  Constitu 
tion.  As  to  any  of  our  newly  acquired  possessions,  it  is  of 
the  utmost  importance  that  we  settle  now,  by  legislation  in 
this  Congress,  our  right  to  put  duties  upon  goods  coming 


The  Porto-Rican  Tariff  361 

from  any  of  our  new  possessions.  Whether  it  be  the  same 
duties  that  we  levy  on  goods  from  foreign  countries,  or 
whether  they  be  preferential  duties  that  we  levy  on  goods 
coming  from  Porto  Rico,  the  fact  that  we  levy  any  duty  will 
settle,  and  this  is  the  only  way  that  we  can  settle,  the  appre 
hension  that  we  must  eventually  receive  goods  free  of  duty 
from  Cuba  and  the  Philippines.  Hawaii  does  not  need  her 
goods  to  come  into  our  ports  free,  for  the  treaty  of  reciprocity 
is  to  stand  and  pretty  much  everything  which  we  use  is 
free  already.  Besides  I  think  it  can  well  be  enacted  in  the 
Hawaiian  bill  that  except  as  to  the  goods  which  were  made 
free  by  our  reciprocity  treaty,  goods  coming  from  Hawaiian 
ports  should  be  subject  to  duty,  either  the  same  as  other 
foreign  countries  or  preferential  duties.  The  trouble  ahead 
of  us,  I  can  see,  is  more  with  the  Philippines  and  with  Cuba, 
when  it  comes  to  us  as  everyone  expects  it  will  finally  come, 
than  with  Porto  Rico  and  Hawaii;  but  it  is  the  first  step  that 
counts  and  it  is  the  establishment  of  a  precedent  that  gives 
trouble.  I  cannot  state  too  emphatically  my  apprehensions 
of  the  political  consequences  which  will  follow  making 
goods  from  any  of  our  new  possessions  free,  and  I  feel  as 
if  I  must  call  your  attention  to  it. 

But  he  did  not  set  out  rashly  on  a  crusade  against 
the  recognized  head  of  his  party.  He  appreciated  the 
importance  of  some  understanding  with  the  Executive 
before  going  so  far  in  his  dissenting  course,  and  soon 
after  his  return  to  Washington  he  went  to  the  White 
House  fortified  with  arguments  to  show  the  President 
the  dangers  in  the  path  upon  which  the  feet  of  the 
administration  were  set.  He  found  Mr.  McKinley,  as 
always,  in  a  reasonable  mood,  and  he  came  away  from 
the  interview  satisfied  that  in  opposing  the  admis 
sion  of  Porto-Rican  products  free  of  duty  he  would 
not  run  counter  to  the  wishes  of  the  administration, 
provided  some  consideration  were  shown  the  island  in 


362  Orville  H.  Platt 

the  way  of  a  discriminating  tariff.  Thus  sustained  he 
undertook  to  organize  the  Republican  forces.  It  was  a 
delicate  task  requiring  tact  as  well  as  courage,  together 
with  complete  mastery  of  the  subject  in  hand;  for  it 
was  no  light  thing  to  marshal  his  own  party  against 
the  President's  declared  policy  while  maintaining 
personal  and  political  relations  unbroken.  That  Sena 
tor  Platt  succeeded  in  accomplishing  his  object,  leaving 
at  the  end  a  satisfied  and  united  party,  was  due  to 
qualities  not  often  found  combined.  The  feeling  with 
which  he  entered  on  his  mission  is  revealed  in  a  letter 
which  he  wrote  early  in  the  discussion : 

I  do  not  wish  to  be  accused  of  being  courageous,  but  it 
has  required  a  great  deal  of  courage  to  withstand  what 
was  apparently  the  purpose  of  the  administration,  of  the 
President  and  Secretary  Root,  with  reference  to  Porto 
Rico,  but  I  think  the  sentiment  here  has  changed  and  is 
coming  around  to  the  idea  that  we  must  not  admit  that  any 
of  our  new  possessions  are  a  part  of  the  United  States 
in  the  sense  that  the  Constitution  extends  itself  over  them, 
or  that  we  must  have  free  trade  with  them.  I  really 
think  that  that  danger  has  passed  now,  though  it  was 
imminent.  Exactly  what  the  outcome  will  be  no  one  can 
foresee.  I  think  it  almost  suicidal  from  the  standpoint 
of  government  and  political  policy  to  attempt  to  do  any 
thing  just  at  present.  We  have  not  had  time  to  think  it 
out  in  detail  and  we  are  liable  to  get  committed  without 
knowing  it.  We  ought  to  continue  military  government 
until  after  the  next  Presidential  election.  .  .  .  The  appeal 
of  Secretary  Root  to  the  President  that  we  have  destroyed 
the  trade  of  Porto  Rico  is  not  well  grounded,  and  the  recom 
mendation  that  we  shall  give  them  free  trade  to  rehabilitate 
them  is  entirely  unnecessary.  A  preferential  duty  would 
do  that  as  fully  as  it  ought  to  be  done.  Free  trade  with 
Porto  Rico  would  make  some  sugar  planters  millionaires 


The  Porto-Rican  Tariff  363 

but  would  not  help  the  people  any  more  than  a  reasonable 
reduction  of  tariff  duties  would.  Free  trade  in  cigars  would 
transfer  the  cigar-making  industry  from  the  United  States 
to  Cuba.  The  American  Tobacco  Company  has  already 
begun  to  purchase  manufactories  and  plantations  in  antici 
pation  of  it.  We  cannot  give  free  trade  to  Porto  Rico 
without  getting  into  trouble  in  Cuba  at  once.  They  will  de 
mand  it  as  a  condition  of  forming  a  government  there  which 
shall  be  satisfactory  to  us  and  making  a  treaty  which 
will  protect  our  interests  there  in  the  future.  I  do  not 
think  that  the  evils  of  free  trade  with  Porto  Rico  are  at  all 
appreciated  yet.  .  .  .  This  whole  matter  is  serious.  The 
danger  is  mitigated.  But  there  is  still  danger  ahead. 

He  embodied  his  own  plan  in  an  amendment  which, 
on  January  24,  1900,  he  proposed  to  the  Senate  bill  pro 
viding  a  government  for  the  island  of  Porto  Rico.  The 
amendment  fixed  a  duty  upon  imports  from  Porto  Rico 
equivalent  to  eighty  per  cent,  of  the  duties  levied  upon 
like  articles  imported  into  the  United  States  from 
foreign  countries,  and  specified  that  the  moneys  thus 
collected  should  be  held  in  the  United  States  Treasury 
as  a  separate  fund  to  be  used  for  the  government  and 
benefit  of  the  island.  He  also  proposed  to  strike  out 
the  provision  for  the  election  of  a  delegate  to  the  House 
of  Representatives.  At  the  same  time  in  pursuance  of 
a  consistent  policy  he  offered  an  amendment  to  the 
Hawaiian  bill  doing  away  with  the  proposed  delegate 
and  providing  "that  until  further  legislation  by  Con 
gress  the  existing  customs  regulations  of  the  Hawaiian 
Islands  with  the  United  States  shall  remain  unchanged." 

The  fight  was  kept  up  all  winter,  and  the  country  was 
set  by  the  ears.  The  Republicans  in  Congress  who 
blocked  our  pathway  to  ' '  plain  duty ' '  were  denounced 
unmercifully  by  the  press  which  was  substantially  a 


364  Orville  H.  Platt 

unit  for  free  trade  with  Porto  Rico,  not  appreciating  the 
readiness  of  the  President  to  accept  a  modification  of 
the  legislation  he  had  urged.  Public  meetings  were 
held  and  resolutions  were  adopted  calling  upon  the 
insurgent  Congressmen  to  abandon  their  policy  of  ob 
struction.  Finally  after  much  discussion  and  many 
canvasses  and  conferences  a  bill  was  agreed  to  per 
mitting  the  entry  of  imports  from  Porto  Rico  on  pay 
ment  of  fifteen  per  cent,  of  the  duties  levied  upon  im 
ports  from  foreign  countries,  the  moneys  collected  to 
be  retained  in  the  Treasury  for  the  use  of  Porto  Rico. 
The  President  signed  the  bill  on  April  i2th.  A  bill  had 
already  become  law  placing  at  the  disposal  of  the  Presi 
dent  for  the  benefit  of  Porto  Rico  over  $2,000,000  which 
had  been  collected  as  duty  on  Porto-Rican  imports 
since  the  evacuation  by  Spain.  When  the  differences 
were  nearing  a  settlement,  Senator  Platt  with  members 
of  his  Committee  was  obliged  to  visit  Cuba  on  a  tour  of 
investigation.  On  his  return  he  found  awaiting  him  a 
letter  from  Dr.  Lyman  Abbott,  editor  of  the  Outlook 
which  had  been  opposed  to  any  tariff  between  Porto 
Rico  and  the  United  States,  asking  him  to  defend  his 
position  in  the  columns  of  the  Outlook: 

I  can  understand  that  some  reason  for  such  a  tariff 
temporarily  imposed  may  be  found  in  the  immediate  finan 
cial  exigencies  of  the  island.  I  cannot  understand  the 
reasons  which  lead  any  one  to  desire  to  impose  a  tariff 
on  Porto-Rican  products  for  the  benefit  of  our  home  in 
dustries.  I  am  very  desirous  that  those  reasons  should 
be  stated  in  our  columns  by  some  one  in  whose  integrity, 
uprightness,  and  statesmanship  the  country  has  confidence, 
because  I  only  wish  to  get  at  the  truth  in  this  matter 
and  to  put  the  truth  and  the  whole  truth  before  our  readers. 

To  Dr.  Abbott's  request  Mr.  Platt  responded  in  a 


The  Porto- Rican  Tariff  365 

letter  which,  while  not  intended  for  publication  at 
the  time,  was  the  most  comprehensive  statement  of 
his  contention  which  he  ever  made : 

I  do  not  think  it  is  advisable  that  I  should  write  an 
article  for  the  Outlook  which  you  suggest.  I  am  of  course 
a  protectionist.  I  am  one  because  I  believe  in  the  system 
of  protection  as  absolutely  necessary  to  the  development  of 
our  industries  and  our  prosperity.  There  is  no  more  hate 
ful  word  in  the  English  language  to  me  than  that  of  "  free 
trade."  There  is  nothing  which  to  my  mind  could  be  so 
disastrous  to  our  country  as  the  abandonment  of  the  doc 
trine  of  protection.  We  have  never  prospered  without  it; 
we  have  always  suffered  with  free  trade  and  revenue  tariff. 
I  am  not  an  advocate  of  protection  because  it  benefits  a  par 
ticular  industry.  I  advocate  it  because  I  believe  without  it 
we  cannot  maintain  the  welfare  and  happiness  of  the  people 
who  labor  in  the  United  States.  In  other  words,  that  the 
single  doctrine  and  idea  of  protection  is  that  the  laboring 
people  of  the  United  States  who  have  become  accustomed 
to  receive  what  I  may  call  American  wages  and  thereby  to 
advance  in  education,  social  affairs,  prosperity,  and  happi 
ness  should  not  be  brought  into  competition  with  cheap  and 
unintelligent  labor  of  other  countries,  and  I  do  not  believe 
in  putting  the  laborers  of  the  United  States  who  receive 
anywhere  from  one  to  five  dollars  a  day  into  competition 
with  the  laborers  of  Porto  Rico  and  the  Philippines  who 
receive  only  from  nine  to  thirty  cents  per  day.  It  is  not 
wise,  and  it  is  not  necessary,  and,  in  the  end  it  would  hurt 
the  laborers  of  the  United  States  more  than  it  would 
benefit  the  laborers  of  Porto  Rico  and  the  Philippines.  I 
do  not  stop  to  inquire  in  what  industries  the  competition 
will  exist.  I  know  it  will  exist  in  some ;  I  believe  it  will  exist 
in  many,  and  that  is  enough  for  me.  We  can  establish 
free  trade  in  the  United  States  as  against  the  foreign 
countries — that  is  to  say,  a  revenue  tariff  only,  which  is 
free  trade,  as  distinguished  from  protection,  if  we  can 


366  Orville  H.  Platt 

reduce  the  price  of  labor  in  the  United  States.  Other 
wise  we  can  not.  I  think  it  is  not  too  much  to  say  that 
every  industry  in  the  United  States  can  compete  with 
industries  in  foreign  countries  by  reducing  labor  to  the  basis 
of  labor  in  foreign  countries.  I  think  it  would  be  sinful  to 
do  it,  however.  But  you  will  say  that  Porto  Rico  is  not  a 
foreign  country,  and  that  the  Philippines  are  not  a  foreign 
country,  and  we  hear  a  great  deal  about  the  Constitution 
following  the  flag  and  the  right  of  all  persons  in  territory 
which  we  may  acquire,  to  be  treated  precisely  as  we  treat 
all  citizens  of  our  own  States.  I  deny  it  constitutionally, 
legally,  and  morally.  When  territory  comes  into  our 
possession  and  under  our  jurisdiction,  our  constitutional, 
legal,  and  moral  obligation  is  to  do  whatever  is  best  for  the 
people  of  such  possessions,  having  our  own  interests  as  well 
as  their  own  at  heart,  and  that  only. 

Underlying  all  this  contention  about  Porto  Rico  is 
first:  the  anti-expansion,  and  anti-imperialist  conten 
tion;  and  second:  the  contention  of  free  trade,  as  against 
protection.  The  anti-imperialist  wants  to  make  it  appear 
that  it  was  a  bad  thing  to  take,  and  is  a  bad  thing  to  hold, 
Porto  Rico  and  the  Philippines,  because  doing  so  we  are 
under  a  constitutional  and  moral  obligation  to  treat  the 
people  whom  we  find  there  just  as  we  treat  our  own  citizens 
without  reference  to  their  condition,  capacity,  or  needs. 
In  other  words,  that  we  must  legislate  for  such  possessions 
with  regard  to  their  ultimate  admission  as  states,  and  have 
neither  the  power  nor  right  to  treat  them  otherwise.  They 
know  perfectly  well  that  if  they  can  make  the  laboring 
people  of  the  United  States  believe  that  we  must  have 
free  trade  with  them  they  will  overthrow  the  administra 
tion  and  in  some  way  compel  the  surrender  of  the  territory, 
which  we  have  already  acquired,  either  to  the  people  there 
under  or  to  some  other  nation.  It  is  for  this  reason  that 
they  roll  President  McKinley's  words  about  "plain  duty" 
and  "free  trade"  as  sweet  morsels  under  their  tongue. 
The  free-trader  also,  who  is  always  on  the  lookout  to 


The  Porto- Rican  Tariff  367 

break  down  the  protective  system  in  the  United  States, 
feels  that  he  has  his  innings  now  and  that  he  has  an  op 
portunity  to  distract  and  possibly  defeat  the  Republican 
party  and  thereby  shake  the  policy  of  protection  to 
American  industries  and  American  labor. 

For  myself,  as  I  have  said,  I  do  not  think  it  was  ever 
necessary  or  wise  to  suggest  the  idea  of  absolute  free  trade 
with  Porto  Rico.  The  Secretary  of  War,  when  he  recom 
mended  it,  took  occasion  to  say  that  he  did  not  consider 
that  we  were  under  any  constitutional  or  legal  obligation 
to  do  it,  but  that  the  war  with  Spain  having  taken  away 
the  trade  of  Porto  Rico  and  the  hurricane  having  destroyed 
their  industries,  we  ought  to  do  it  for  the  purpose  of  re 
habilitating  the  island. 

It  was  scarcely  true  that  the  war  had  taken  away  their 
trade  with  Spain,  but  if  true,  free  trade  could  not  help 
them  as  to  their  principal  product,  coffee,  for  that  was 
always  free.  For  sugar,  their  next  great  product,  ours 
has  always  been  their  particular  market,  and  Spain  one  of 
their  smaller  markets.  Tobacco  has  never  been  exported 
to  Spain  but  has  been  exported  to  Cuba  largely.  It  would 
have  continued  to  be  exported  to  Cuba,  had  not  Mr.  Porter, 
who  arranged  the  new  Cuban  tariff,  put  a  prohibitive 
duty  of  five  dollars  a  pound  on  tobacco  sent  to  Cuba,  so 
that  it  was  scarcely  true  that  the  war  with  Spain  had  taken 
away  the  trade' of  the  islands.  Nor  was  it  true  that  abso 
lute  free  trade  was  required  for  its  recuperation.  Any 
reduction  of  tariff  duties  which  gave  a  fair  advantage  over 
the  producers  of  other  countries  would  have  accomplished 
the  work  as  certainly  as  absolute  free  trade.  Reckoning  the 
population  of  Porto  Rico  at  a  million,  there  are  accord 
ing  to  reports,  800,000  who  never  wear  a  shoe,  and  50,000 
more  who  only  wear  them  occasionally.  I  do  not  speak  of 
this  to  disparage  the  people,  but  merely  to  indicate  that  the 
masses  are  not  to  be  greatly  benefited  by  free  trade.  The 
planters  who  raise  the  sugar  and  the  tobacco  will  have  a 
gold  mine  opened  for  them  as  it  were,  and  a  free  present  of 


368  Orville  H.  Platt 

that  mine  made  by  the  United  States,  and  that  is  all  there  is 
of  it.  The  twenty-five  per  cent,  reduction  of  tariff  rates, 
compared  with  the  rates  from  other  countries  and  to  other 
countries  would  have  been  just  as  effective  to  stimulate  the 
industries  and  help  the  people  of  Porto  Rico  as  absolute 
free  trade.  But  I  cannot  say  these  things  very  well  in  a 
newspaper  article  or,  indeed,  in  a  speech. 

The  President  has,  I  think,  in  the  generosity  born  of  a 
great  soul,  made  an  unfortunate  recommendation  which  was 
seized  upon  by  his  enemies,  by  the  anti-expansionists  and 
anti-imperialists,  and  by  free-traders  to  advance  their 
purposes,  and  to  elect  Mr.  Bryan  President;  but  I  do  not 
feel  that  I  should  add  anything  to  their  weapons  by  say 
ing  that  I  thought  the  original  recommendation  of  the 
President  was  unfortunate.  The  use  made  of  it  by  his 
enemies  made  it  necessary  to  assert  the  principle  in  legisla 
tion  that  we  were  not  bound  to  treat  the  people  of  Porto 
Rico  and  the  Philippines  as  citizens  of  the  United  States, 
or  to  concede  their  right  to  ultimate  statehood.  The 
fifteen  per  cent,  of  duty  provided  for  in  the  Porto-Rican 
bill  asserts  that  principle,  and  for  that  reason  and  because 
the  bill  proceeds  upon  the  idea  that  we  are  not  bound  to 
make  a  state  of  Porto  Rico  it  secures  my  support. 


CHAPTER  XXVIII 

RECIPROCITY  WITH  CUBA 

Bulwark  of  the  Administration — Leader  of  Long  Struggle  in 
Congress — Opposition  at  Home — Ratification  of  Treaty. 

A  CRUCIAL  test  of  Senator  Platt's  patriotism  and 
r\  courage  came  with  the  acceptance  of  the  Platt 
Amendment  and  the  resulting  obligations  which  fell 
upon  the  United  States.  Even  while  Cuba  was  under 
our  military  control  he  had  taken  the  question  of  its 
future  commercial  relations  with  the  United  States  into 
serious  consideration,  and  had  come  to  the  conclusion 
that  in  due  season  the  island  must  be,  at  least  nominally, 
independent,  with  a  reciprocal  trade  arrangement  with 
the  United  States,  which  would  enable  it  to  survive 
commercially  and  thus  prevent  its  falling  perforce  into 
the  absolute  possession  of  the  United  States  with  the 
resulting  perils  of  annexation  and  statehood. 

As  early  as  January,  1901,  Leonard  Wood,  governor- 
general  of  Cuba,  had  taken  up  the  question  of  special 
trade  arrangements  and  had  written  letters  to  several 
Senators  urging  action  along  that  line.  He  asked  the 
War  Department  for  a  fifty  per  cent,  reduction  in  the 
export  duty  on  Cuban  tobacco  and  he  also  asked  Con 
gress  that  consideration  be  given  Cuban  sugar  and  to 
bacco  imported  into  the  United  States  as  in  the  case  of 
Porto  Rico.  ' '  Of  course  we  cannot  expect  equal 
consideration,"  he  pleaded,  "but  for  Heaven's  sake  give 

24  369 


370  Orville  H.  Platt 

us  something,  if  only  twenty-five  per  cent.  It  will  do 
more  than  all  else  to  clear  the  political  situation  and 
bring  openly  and  strongly  to  our  support,  the  classes 
of  people  always  friendly  to  us,  the  commercial,  the 
planters,  and  agriculturists."  He  reported  that  the 
country  was  profoundly  tranquil,  that  a  friendly 
feeling  for  the  United  States  prevailed  among  all  the 
better  classes,  and  the  producers,  but  that  the  agitating 
group  were  desperate  and  hungry.  "They  want  to  get 
the  government  in  their  hands,  settle  their  claims,  and 
after  that  the  devil  can  take  the  hindmost."  The 
restrictive  conditions  of  the  Foraker  Amendment,  the 
heavy  export  duty  on  tobacco,  and  the  ruinous  duty 
upon  tobacco  and  sugar  imported  into  the  United  States 
made  it  no  easy  task  to  instil  enthusiasm  into  the  people 
over  the  blessings  of  American  control,  and  in  the  judg 
ment  of  General  Wood  it  was  of  vital  importance  to 
come  to  their  relief.  The  Secretary  of  War  approved 
the  recommendation  for  a  fifty  per  cent,  reduction 
in  the  export  duty  on  tobacco,  but  beyond  that  it  was 
impossible  for  the  executive  branch  of  the  Government 
to  go.  Neither  could  the  legislative  branch  undertake 
any  measure  of  relief  while  Cuba  remained  under  our 
military  control,  and  Senator  Platt  thought  he  saw  in 
this  circumstance  an  argument  which  might  be  used  to 
induce  the  Cuban  Constitutional  Convention,  then  in 
wrangling  session,  to  determine  before  adjournment 
what  the  future  relations  between  Cuba  and  the  United 
States  were  to  be.  He  wrote  both  to  General  Wood  and 
to  Secretary  Root  along  this  line.  To  General  Wood 
he  explained  that  he  did  not  see  how  it  was  possible 
to  reduce  duties  on  Cuban  sugar  and  tobacco  until 
Cuba  became  an  independent  country  and  could  make 
treaties : 


Reciprocity  with  Cuba  371 

We  cannot  reduce  the  duties  on  products  coming  from 
one  country  without  reducing  them  equally  when  coming 
from  other  countries  with  whom  we  have  treaties  contain 
ing  the  favored  nation  clause.  When  Cuba's  independence 
is  recognized  by  the  United  States,  we  can  then  make  a 
reciprocity  treaty  with  her,  reducing  our  duties  on  her 
products  in  consideration  of  reductions  on  goods  which 
are  imported  there,  and  I  should  think  that  if  Cubans 
understood  this  it  would  be  a  great  inducement  to  them  to 
determine  the  relations  which  shall  exist  between  Cuba 
and  the  United  States  after  her  government  is  set  up.  It 
seems  to  me  that  this  is  the  strongest  argument  which 
you  have  to  persuade  Cuba  before  the  adjournment  of  her 
Constitutional  Convention  to  determine  what  the  relations 
are  to  be  between  the  two  countries. 

The  Platt  Amendment  was  adopted  by  Congress  a 
few  weeks  later  and  the  Cuban  Convention  spent  many 
weeks  bandying  words  as  to  how  it  should  be  embodied 
in  the  new  constitution  or  whether  it  should  be  embodied 
there  at  all.  Late  in  April  a  delegation  of  members 
of  the  Convention  came  to  Washington  to  confer  with 
the  Secretary  of  War.  They  asked  for  a  promise  that, 
if  the  pro  visions  of  the  Platt  Amendment  were  accepted, 
the  United  States  would  enter  into  reciprocal  com 
mercial  relations  with  Cuba.  Of  course  such  a  pledge 
involving  the  action  of  Congress  could  not  be  given, 
but  in  so  far  as  it  was  able  the  administration  gave 
assurances  which  were  satisfactory  to  the  delegates. 
Concerning  this  period  Mr.  Platt  wrote  over  a  year  later 
in  an  article  published  in  the  North  American  Review, 
at  a  time  when  Congress  had  shown  exasperating 
reluctance  to  take  up  the  question  of  trade  relations 
with  Cuba: 

During  all  the  period  of  our  military  occupation,  leading 


372  Orville  H.  Platt 

up  to  Cuban  independence,  it  was  understood  that  the 
economic  relations  between  Cuba  and  the  United  States 
were  as  important  as  their  political  relations,  f  When  the 
United  States  required  of  Cuba  that  her  constitution'  should 
contain  guarantees  which  should  forever  place  her  in  a 
position  of  intimate  relations  to  us,  it  was  universally 
understood  that  we  on  our  part  would  aid  her  by  providing 
such  reciprocal  commercial  advantages  as  would  enable  her 
to  be  self- reliant  and  self- supporting^  The  Monroe  Doctrine, 
which  we  had  declared  three  quarters  of  a  century  ago  and 
insisted  upon  as  our  right,  was  wrought  into  a  compact 
between  the  two  countries,  so  that  thenceforth,  as  to  Cuba, 
it  was  no  longer  to  rest  upon  assertion  alone  but  upon  con 
stitutional  agreement.  While  we  did  not  ask  of  Cuba  in 
form  that  she  should  not  enter  into  commercial  arrange 
ments  with  other  countries  to  our  disadvantage,  the  natural 
currents  of  trade  made  it  a  practical  impossibility  for  her 
to  do  so,  and  a  commission  sent  to  us  from  her  Constitu 
tional  Convention  returned  home  with  the  just  expectation 
that  a  compliance  with  our  desires  as  to  her  constitutional 
guarantees  would  be  followed  by  the  establishment  of 
mutual  trade  relations  which  .would  prove  to  be  of  great 
economic  advantage  to  her.  /The  Constitutional  Conven 
tion  of  Cuba  asked,  as  a  return  for  their  acceptance  of 
the  provisions  which  we  had  requested,  that  there  should 
be  some  promise  given  by  the  United  States  of  the  estab 
lishment  of  advantageous  relations  with  us.  In  the 
nature  of  things  such  a  promise  was  impossible,  but  the 
Convention  was  asked  to  act  in  the  premises  and  to  trust 
the  United  StategJ  It  did  incorporate  into  its  consti 
tution  provisions  which  we  thought  essential  for  us,  and 
it  did  trust  us  to  provide  by  legislation,  or  treaty,  commer 
cial  advantages  which  she  could  not  obtain  from  other  coun 
tries.  So,  up  to  the  opening  of  our  last  Congress  all  was 
well.  The  Cuban  constitution  was  adopted.  Complete  in 
dependence  awaited  only  the  necessary  successive  steps  for 
its  establishment.  Its  merchants,  its  planters,  and  labor- 


Reciprocity  with  Cuba  373 

ers  waited  in  trustful  confidence  that  the  United  States, 
through  its  Congress,  would  provide  for  the  industrial  as 
it  had  already  provided  for  the  political  independence  of 
Cuba.  Not  only  was  this  anticipated  in  Cuba,  but  here  as 
well.  No  one  could  have  foreseen  that  the  United  States 
would  deliberately  refuse  to  discharge  its  obligation.  The 
United  States  had  never  been  a  faith-breaker;  its  worst 
enemy  could  ncrt  have  predicted  that  it  would  become  one. 

His  own  feeling  about  the  provisions  of  a  reciprocal 
agreement  is  shown  in  a  letter  which  he  wrote  on  June 
n,  1901,  to  an  American  sugar-planter  in  Cuba  who 
had  been  urging  early  action : 

Cuba  wants  advantages  by  way  of  a  reciprocity  treaty 
upon  its  productions,  the  principal  of  which  are  now 
sugar,  tobacco,  and  fruit.  I  do  not  believe  that  there 
would  be  any  serious  objection  to  a  reduction  of  the  duties 
on  Cuban  sugar  and  tobacco ;  I  think  there  would  be  a  pretty 
vigorous  opposition  in  the  matter  of  fruits.  It  would  not 
be  to  the  advantage  of  Cuba  to  have  free  trade  in  sugar  and 
tobacco,  because  free  trade  with  Cuba  in  these  products 
would,  I  think,  practically  result  in  free  trade  with  other 
countries.  If  it  can  get  a  fair  reduction  of  duty  on  sugar 
and  tobacco,  it  will  put  the  island  in  a  good  condition,  and 
this  I  think  can  be  done  if  Cuba  gives  advantages  to  our 
products.  In  other  words,  that  a  fair  reciprocity  treaty 
can  be  negotiated  and  ratified  in  the  Senate. 

Up  to  the  time  of  meeting  of  the  Fifty-seventh 
Congress  in  December,  1901,  there  was  no  other  thought 
in  the  public  mind  than  that  action  would  be  taken 
speedily  for  the  relief  of  Cuba.  It  was  known  to  be 
President  McKinley's  wish,  and  upon  his  death  Presi 
dent  Roosevelt  accepted  as  a  matter  of  course  the 
responsibility  of  carrying  the  policy  into  effect.  In  his 
first  annual  message  Mr.  Roosevelt  recommended  such 


374  Orville  H.  Platt 

"substantial  tariff  reductions"  as  were  necessary  to 
insure  industrial  prosperity,  and  in  due  order  a  suitable 
bill  for  this  purpose  was  introduced  in  the  House  and 
referred  to  the  Ways  and  Means  Committee  which 
began  a  series  of  hearings.  Then  suddenly  there  arose  a 
cloud  in  the  sky.  The  beet-sugar  and  tobacco  interests 
had  been  quietly  at  work  through  the  summer  and  fall, 
and  the  American  Protective  Tariff  League  had  busied 
itself  in  stirring  up  opposition  in  Congress.  A  group 
of  insurgent  Republicans  in  the  House,  who  took  upon 
themselves  the  then  timely  appellation  of  "Boxers," 
banded  themselves  together  with  the  avowed  purpose 
of  defeating  reciprocity  legislation.  Mr.  Platt  has  told 
the  rest  of  the  story  in  the  article  from  which  a  quo 
tation  has  already  been  made : 

We  had  begun  in  several  States  to  produce  sugar  from 
beets,  and  for  many  years  we  had  been  producing  in  one  or 
two  States  sugar  from  cane.  All  at  once  and  without  rea 
son,  the  cry  was  raised  that  any  reduction  of  the  duty  on 
sugar  coming  from  Cuba  would  injure,  strike  down,  and  de 
stroy  the  beet-  and  cane-sugar  industry  of  the  United  States. 
Members  and  Senators  from  States  in  which  these  industries 
were  established  became  first  timid,  then  needlessly  fright 
ened,  lest  their  assent  to  legislation  favoring  reciprocal  trade 
relations  with  Cuba  would  lose  them  their  seats.  Most  of 
these  Senators  and  Representatives  were  Republicans.  They 
were  few  in  number  compared  to  the  whole  body  of  Republi 
cans,  but  they  were  numerous  enough,  by  joining  with  the 
Democrats  who  were  ready  for  any  action  which  should 
divide  Republican  forces,  to  prevent  wise  and  necessary 
legislation;  and  so  the  contest  began. 

As  time  went  on,  facts  were  ignored,  fears  were  magni 
fied,  prejudice  invoked,  until  reason  and  cool  judgment 
seemed  to  have  entirely  departed.  Two  assertions,  neither 
of  which  could  be  sustained  by  proof,  formed  the  control- 


Reciprocity  with  Cuba  .375 

ling  basis  of  action  by  the  few  Republicans  who  have  been 
spoken  of.  First,  the  assertion  that  to  reduce  the  tariff 
on  Cuban  sugar  by  twenty-five  or  even  twenty  per  cent. 
would  take  away  the  protection  enjoyed  by  the  beet-  and 
cane-sugar  producers  in  the  United  States — an  assertion 
which  is  absolutely  groundless,  as  is  shown  by  the  fact 
that  we  take  into  our  country,  free  of  duty,  500,000  tons  of 
sugar  from  Hawaii  and  Porto  Rico,  while  maintaining 
the  duty  against  all  other  countries,  without  in  any  way 
interfering  with  the  protection  of  our  own  sugar  producers. 
Second,  the  assertion  that  the  so-called  sugar  trust  would 
derive  all  the  benefit  resulting  from  any  reduction  of  the 
duty  on  Cuban  sugar — an  assertion  which  is  equally 
groundless,  as  is  shown  by  the  fact  that  Hawaiian  sugar 
and  Porto-Rican  sugar,  though  duty  free,  have  brought 
the  same  price  in  American  markets  as  sugars  from  Cuba 
or  Germany.  The  prejudice  against  the  sugar  trust  was 
continually,  and  most  successfully,  appealed  to.  It  was 
so  apparent  that  any  reduction  of  the  duty  upon  Cuban 
sugar  proposed  would  not  reduce  the  price  of  home  pro 
duced  sugar,  that  it  is  not  probable  that  this  argument 
alone  could  have  resulted  in  defeating  the  suggested  legis 
lation,  and  so  the  plea  that  the  trust,  rather  than  the  Cuban 
planter,  was  to  be  benefited  was  the  objection  most  relied 
upon.  It  is  a  curious  fact  that  while  there  is  a  popular 
belief  that  combinations  and  trusts  control  legislation  in 
Congress,  it  is  nevertheless  true  that  the  most  effective 
means  of  preventing  legislation  is  to  assert  that  a  combina 
tion  or  trust  desires  it.  Even  staid  legislators  lose  their 
heads  when  the  statement  is  made  that  a  trust  is  favoring 
a  measure.  The  sugar  trust  is  perhaps  the  most  unpopular 
of  all  capitalistic  combinations  in  the  United  States,  and 
the  apprehension  excited  by  continual  reiteration  that  the 
legislation  in  question  was  being  supported  and  would 
inure  to  the  benefit  of  the  sugar  trust  was  most  potent. 
In  the  opinion  of  the  writer  it  was  utterly  fallacious.  That 
it  was  successful  in  defeating  for  the  time  being  the 


376  Orville  H.  Platt 

performance  of  our  plain  duty  with  regard  to  Cuba,  must 
be  admitted.  Nowhere  in  the  United  States  is  public  senti 
ment  so  liable  to  be  misunderstood  as  in  the  city  of  Wash 
ington  while  Congress  is  in  session,  and  the  fear  that  the 
beet-sugar  industry  might  possibly  be  injured,  and  that  the 
sugar  trust  might  possibly  reap  some  benefit  as  a  result  of 
the  proposed  legislation,  was  so  skilfully  manipulated,  so 
cunningly  fostered,  and  so  persistently  and  vigorously 
reiterated,  that  the  main  question  was  practically  obscured. 
Many  members  took  counsel  of  their  fears  rather  than  of 
their  judgment;  fear  developed  into  frenzy;  suspicion 
usurped  the  province  of  fact;  prejudice  was  more  potent 
than  reason;  the  well-considered  policy  of  two  adminis 
trations  and  an  overwhelming  sentiment  of  moral  obliga 
tion  were  ignored.  Pledges  were  sought  and  obtained, 
until  it  became  apparent  that  no  legislation  looking  to  the 
relief  of  Cuba  and  the  extension  of  our  own  trade  was 
possible,  except  such  as  might  be  dictated  by  the  opposi 
tion  for  party  advantage  without  reference  to  the  interests 
of  Cuba  or  ourselves. 


The  President  in  a  special  message  tried  unsuccess 
fully,  to  bring  Congress  back  to  the  real  question  in 
volved,  of  our  national  obligation  to  Cuba,  and  Congress 
adjourned  in  the  early  summer  of  1902  with  nothing 
done. 

The  bill  which  passed  the  House  after  a  memorable 
struggle  was  dictated  by  the  opposition,  and  as  the  un 
friendly  sentiment  in  the  Senate  was  strong  and  eager 
enough  to  prevent  favorable  action,  it  was  useless  to 
bring  the  bill  out  of  committee.  Mr.  Platt  had  no 
opportunity  to  deal  directly  with  the  question,  but 
early  in  the  struggle  he  seized  an  opportunity  to  issue 
a  short  statement  to  the  press  which  left  no  doubt  about 
where  he  stood : 


Reciprocity  with  Cuba  377 

I  am  a  protectionist  and  have  been  so  much  so  that 
I  have  been  called  a  partisan.  I  am  as  strong  a  protec 
tionist  now  as  I  ever  was,  but  believe  proper  and  reason 
able  concessions  can  be  made  to  Cuban  products  in  return 
for  proper  and  reasonable  tariff  concessions  to  certain 
of  our  products,  which  would  greatly  benefit  the  trade  of 
both  countries,  and  not  appreciably  injure  any  American 
industry. 

I  think  the  cause  of  protection  is  being  wounded  now 
in  the  house  of  its  professed  friends,  and  that  the  free 
trader  cannot  injure  the  cause  of  protection  as  much  as 
protectionists  who  insist  upon  unreasonable  and  unneces 
sary  customs  duties. 

Towards  the  end  of  the  session,  replying  to  an  attack 
on  reciprocity  which  had  been  injected  into  a  general 
debate  by  Senator  Teller,  he  took  advantage  of  another 
opportunity  to  declare  himself  in  an  emphatic  way. 
Seventy-five  per  cent,  of  the  people  of  the  United 
States  he  declared  were  going  to  be  "  disappointed  and 
chagrined  and  humiliated  "  because  Congress  was  going 
to  adjourn  without  taking  action  upon  the  question : 

That  humiliation,  that  disappointment,  and  that  chagrin 
will  not  down,  Mr.  President.  The  people  of  the  United 
States  see  through  all  these  things  and  are  not  going  to 
be  diverted  in  their  sense  of  what  we,  in  justice  and  self- 
interest,  owe  to  Cuba  and  ourselves  in  this  matter,  by  any 
thing  which  may  be  alluded  to  for  the  purpose  of  obscuring 
the  real  issue  in  this  matter.  That  sentiment  will  grow, 
as  it  ought  to  grow. 

I  desire  to  say  here  that  from  the  day  Cuba  came  into 
our  military  occupation  I  have  seen  or  thought  I  saw  that 
there  could  be  but  one  ending  to  this  matter — either 
that  we  must  come  into  such  economic  relations  with  Cuba 
as  would  give  that  republic  created  by  us — in  a  measure 


378  Orville  H.  Platt 

shut  off  from  profitable  communication  with  the  rest  of 
the  world — such  fair  prosperity  as  would  produce  content 
ment  and  happiness  and  affection  for  the  United  States, 
or,  on  the  other  hand,  such  a  condition  in  Cuba  as  would 
eventually  compel  us  to  accept  at  the  hands  of  the  dis 
appointed  people  of  Cuba  an  offer  for  annexation  to  the 
United  States. 

I  regard  that,  Mr.  President,  as  the  greatest  peril  which 
to-day  besets  our  Government.  I  can  think  of  no  future 
danger  to  be  so  much  apprehended  as  that.  When  we 
begin  to  annex  to  our  country  foreign  territories  with 
foreign  inhabitants,  inhabitants  alien  to  our  race,  to  our 
habits,  to  our  customs,  to  our  traditions,  and  to  our  in 
stitutions,  with  the  near  certainty  that  statehood  is  to 
follow,  we  shall  have  taken  the  first  step,  in  my  judgment, 
toward  the  demoralization,  if  not  the  disintegration,  of 
our  republican  institutions. 

I  think  we  have  come  to  a  crisis  in  our  affairs.  I  think 
we  have  one  plain  duty,  and  that  is  so  to  treat  Cuba,  with 
reference  to  her  commercial  relations  to  the  United  States, 
as  that  we  may  make  and  keep  her  our  friend.  I  stand  for  a 
permanent  republic  in  Cuba.  If  the  amendment,  which  I 
had  the  honor  to  present  to  the  Army  bill  at  the  last  session, 
meant  anything,  it  meant  that  Cuba  was  not  only  to  have 
its  independence,  but  that  the  United  States  stood  and 
would  stand  ready  at  hand  to  see  that  that  independent 
and  republican  government  was  permanent  in  the  island 
of  Cuba. 

I  believe  that  the  best  interests  of  that  people  and  the 
best  interests  of  the  United  States,  the  best  interests  of 
that  Government  and  of  our  Government  should  lead  us 
to  such  close  reciprocal,  commercial,  and  political  relations 
as  that  we  shall  always  be  friends  and  shall  not  be  called 
upon  to  absorb  Cuba. 

President  Roosevelt  would  not  have  been  true  to  his 
known  character  if  he  had  permitted  the  affair  to  end 


Reciprocity  with  Cuba  379 

here.  Congress  having  ignored  his  urgent  message,  he 
nevertheless  kept  up  the  fight.  On  May  20,  1902,  the 
United  States  forces  had  been  withdrawn  from  Cuba, 
in  accordance  with  the  terms  of  the  Platt  Amendment, 
and  the  administration  proceeded  to  negotiate  with  the 
Government  of  the  new  republic  a  reciprocity  treaty 
to  carry  our  implied  promises  into  effect.  It  is  a  curious 
commentary  on  the  inexperience  of  the  people  with 
whom  our  State  Department  had  to  deal  that  after 
we  had  sent  our  draft  of  the  treaty  to  Havana  we  were 
compelled  also  to  send  one  of  our  own  American 
officers,  General  Tasker  H.  Bliss,  who  had  been  in  charge 
of  the  Cuban  customs,  to  teach  them  what  to  do  with 
it,  how  to  propose  objections  and  counter-proposals  and 
put  their  case  before  our  Government  in  a  practical 
way.  Otherwise  the  treaty  might  never  have  passed 
beyond  its  initial  stages.  It  was  signed  at  last  at 
Havana  on  December  nth,  and  duly  transmitted  to  the 
Senate.  In  the  meantime  President  Roosevelt,  in 
numerous  speeches  during  a  tour  through  many 
States,  had  appealed  to  the  American  people,  on  every 
consideration  of  a  generous  and  far-sighted  public 
policy,  to  prove  to  Cuba  that  our  friendship  with  her 
was  of  a  continuing  character  and  that  we  intended  to 
aid  her  in  her  struggle  for  material  prosperity.  The 
President  in  his  annual  message  called  attention  to  the 
treaty  which  he  was  about  to  send  to  the  Senate.  He 
urged  the  adoption  of  reciprocity: 

Not  only  because  it  is  eminently  for  our  own  interests 
to  control  the  Cuban  market  and  by  every  means  to  foster 
our  supremacy  in  the  tropical  lands  and  waters  south  of 
us,  but  also  because  we,  of  the  giant  republic  of  the  north, 
should  make  all  our  sister  nations  of  the  American  continent 


380  Orville  H.  Platt 

feel  that  whenever  they  will  permit  it  we  desire  to  show  our 
selves  disinterestedly  and  effectively  their  friend. 

Even  with  this  urging,  the  treaty  hung  on  all  winter. 
Finally  in  the  special  session  of  March,  1903,  the  Senate 
ratified  it  with  an  amendment  declaring  the  approval 
of  the  convention  by  Congress  to  be  necessary  before 
it  should  take  effect.  This  meant  a  further  vexatious 
delay,  but  public  sentiment  at  last  had  become  aroused. 
The  situation  in  Cuba  during  the  summer  became  more 
and  more  pressing  and  President  Roosevelt,  encouraged 
to  action  by  Senator  Platt  and  other  friends  of  the  new 
republic,  called  Congress  to  meet  in  extra  session  on 
November  9,  1903,  to  enact  the  legislation  necessary 
to  put  the  treaty  into  effect,  prior  to  the  time  for  mov 
ing  the  sugar  crop  in  December. 

Mr.  Platt  was  besieged  on  every  hand.  The  tobacco 
interests  of  Connecticut  were  bitterly  opposed  to  the 
suggested  arrangement,  and  there  were  ominous  hints 
as  to  the  possibility  of  his  re-election.  But  he  stood 
by  his  guns.  When  assailed  with  letters  and  telegrams 
protesting  against  his  course,  he  hit  back  unflinchingly. 
A  cigar-makers'  union  of  New  Haven  sent  him  a  set 
of  resolutions  demanding  that  he  oppose  the  Cuban 
legislation;  he  replied: 

I  would  be  glad  to  comply  with  your  request  except 
for  two  reasons : 

First — I  have  studied  this  question  pretty  carefully 
and  am  convinced  that  the  cigar-makers  and  manufac 
turers  of  cigars  will  not  be  appreciably  harmed  by  the 
passage  of  legislation  to  put  the  Cuban  reciprocity  treaty 
into  effect,  and 

Second — That  it  will  be  for  the  interest  of  the  whole 
country  to  have  such  legislation  passed. 

While  I  would  like  to  meet  the  wishes  of  my  constituents, 


Reciprocity  with  Cuba  381 

I  feel  that  I  must  exercise  my  independent  judgment  in 
this  matter. 

The  editor  of  a  New  Haven  newspaper  who  for  many 
years  had  been  his  friend  in  season  and  out  appealed 
to  him  in  behalf  of  the  sugar  and  tobacco  interests.  He 
wrote  back: 

The  reduction  on  Cuban  imports  will  not  hurt  the  sugar 
or  tobacco  industry  one  particle.  Neither  the  sugar  trust 
nor  the  tobacco  trust  will  derive  the  slightest  benefit  from 
it.  The  talk  about  it  has  been  the  greatest  exhibition  of 
expansive  bosh  that  I  have  ever  known.  It  will  not  reduce 
the  price  of  sugar  in  our  market  one  eighth  of  a  cent,  so 
long  as  we  maintain  the  duty  on  sugar,  and  if  that  should 
come  off  of  course  this  reduction  would  not  affect  it.  There 
will  be  no  additional  importation  of  cigars  from  Cuba  by 
reason  of  the  reduction — there  might  be  a  forty  per  cent, 
reduction  and  there  would  not.  I  believe  that  we  do  not 
gain  a  great  deal  from  the  trade  of  Cuba  by  it — in  that 
respect  I  think  it  is  one-sided;  but  if  we  could  afford  to 
spend  three  hundred  million  dollars  to  establish  the  in 
dependence  of  Cuba,  I  think  we  can  afford  to  forego  a  few 
million  dollars  annually  to  make  it  more  certain  that  that 
independence  will  be  maintained. 

The  acting  president  of  the  American  Protective 
Tariff  League  sent  a  circular  letter  to  all  Republican 
Senators  urging  them  to  stand  against  the  legislation 
urged  by  the  President.  Mr.  Platt  responded : 

I  believe  you  and  the  American  Protective  Tariff  League, 
if  you  represent  it,  are  all  wrong  about  this  Cuban  recipro 
city  business,  and  that  you  are  doing  the  cause  of  protection 
an  injury  which  its  enemies  can  not  do  it.  In  this  I  am 
certain  that  I  speak  the  sentiment  of  the  best  friends  of 
protection — not  only  here  but  throughout  the  country.  I 


382  Orville  H.  Platt 

think  you  are  decidedly  mistaken  and  are  therefore  mis 
representing  the  sentiment  of  protectionists. 

Excuse  me  for  speaking  thus  plainly,  but  I  am  sure 
that  I  am  telling  you  of  a  condition  which  you  ought  to 
appreciate. 

Real  public  sentiment  at  last  was  effective.  Congress, 
faced  once  more  with  the  proposition,  uncomplicated 
with  any  other  question,  was  ready  to  act.  The 
Reciprocity  bill  passed  the  House  on  November  ipth, 
by  a  vote  of  335  to  21.  It  was  adopted  by  the  Senate 
in  the  regular  session  a  month  later  by  a  vote  of  57  to  1 8. 
From  a  perusal  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Senate  it  might 
not  appear  that  Senator  Platt  had  taken  an  especially 
active  part  in  securing  this  legislation ;  yet  he  had  been 
the  strongest  bulwark  of  the  administration  in  Congress 
from  the  beginning,  and  the  weight  which  attached  to 
his  support  of  reciprocity  was  all  the  greater  because 
of  his  record  as  an  advocate  of  high  protection.  His 
advice  and  counsel  moreover  had  been  of  the  utmost 
value  to  the  administration  in  its  dealings  with  Cuba 
on  account  of  his  prestige  as  the  author  of  the  Platt 
Amendment.  He  regarded  the  victory  as  one  of  the 
most  gratifying  incidents  of  his  whole  career.  During 
all  the  months  of  discussion  no  more  impressive  words 
were  written  than  those  which  were  embodied  in  his 
noble  appeal  to  the  righteous  impulse  of  the  American 
people : 

The  doings  of  nations  are  like  the  acts  of  individuals; 
motive  and  action  make  character  both  in  men  and  in 
nations.  It  is  the  man  of  pure  motive,  of  brave  deeds  and 
steady  purpose  who  builds  for  himself  a  noble  character. 
If  the  motive,  the  deed,  and  the  purpose  are  but  feeble 
and  soon  abandoned,  the  resultant  character  is  ignoble.  So 
with  us  as  a  people.  Though  our  purpose  was  lofty,  though 


Reciprocity  with  Cuba  383 

our  triumph  was  striking,  if  we  fail  now  in  accomplishment 
we  shall  be  either  pitied  or  despised.  Nations,  like  men, 
incur  honorable  obligations.  If  fulfilled  to  the  letter,  true 
growth  is  the  result ;  if  ignored,  by  men  or  nations,  the  just 
contempt  of  mankind  is  incurred.  Our  obligation  did  not 
cease  when  Spain  was  driven  from  Cuba,  or  when  years  of 
careful  and  unselfish  administration  resulted  in  the  estab 
lishment  of  the  Cuban  republic.  When  we  undertook  to 
put  an  end  to  bad  government  in  Cuba,  we  became  respon 
sible  for  the  establishment,  and  the  maintenance  as  well, 
of  a  good  government  there.  The  world  will  properly 
hold  us  bound  in  all  honor  so  to  treat  the  republic  which 
we  ourselves  have  set  up  that  it  shall  be  both  prosperous 
and  stable.  The  United  States,  if  true  to  its  history  and 
its  character,  must  train  up  its  child  in  the  way  it  should 
go,  so  that  when  old  it  will  not  depart  from  it. 


CHAPTER  XXIX 

AGAINST  TARIFF  REVISION 

Opposed  to  Tariff  Tinkering  in  1905 — Letter  to  President  Roose 
velt — Saves  Dingley  Law. 

THAT  the  episode  of  Cuban  reciprocity  did  not  carry 
with  it  a  modification  of  Senator  Platt's  attitude 
toward  the  policy  of  protection  soon  became  clear. 
The  position  which  he  maintained  throughout  his  life 
was  that  indicated  in  a  letter  which  he  had  written 
about  the  time  of  the  passage  of  the  Dingley  act,  in 
which  he  said : 

I  do  not  recognize  the  distinction  between  high  pro 
tection  and  moderate  protection.  Protection  to  my  mind 
means  such  duties  on  foreign  products  as  shall  fairly  equal 
ize  the  difference  in  the  cost  of  production. 

For  some  reason  which  has  never  been  satisfactorily 
explained  along  the  lines  of  political  logic,  the  election 
of  1904  was  followed  by  a  demand  in  influential  Repub 
lican  circles  for  a  revision  of  the  Dingley  Tariff  law  which 
had  then  been  in  operation  eight  years,  and  the  life 
of  which  had  been  coincident  with  the  period  of  greatest 
prosperity  in  the  history  of  the  United  States.  There 
had  been  no  party  pledges  that  a  revision  would  be 
made — indeed,  the  tariff  question  had  hardly  figured 
in  the  campaign  one  way  or  the  other,  the  occa 
sional  allusions  to  it  being  by  way  of  endorsement  of 
the  Dingley  law,  with  startling  comparisons  between 

384 


Against  Tariff  Revision  385 

the  business  distress  of  the  Cleveland  administration 
and  the  financial  rejoicing  of  the  succeeding  years. 
But  no  sooner  was  the  election  over,  with  its  unprece 
dented  Republican  majority,  than  there  arose  a  cry  for 
a  special  session  of  Congress  to  be  called  immediately 
after  March  4th,  to  take  up  the  tariff  question  and 
remedy  the  defects  of  the  Dingley  law.  It  is  true  that 
nobody  could  point  out  just  where  those  defects  were, 
or  what  particular  schedule  of  the  tariff  needed  revision, 
but  the  feeling  undoubtedly  prevailed,  and  many  people 
had  been  convinced  by  a  certain  element  of  the  press, 
that  something,  vaguely,  must  be  done. 

President  Roosevelt,  continued  in  the  White  House 
by  an  unexampled  expression  of  the  popular  will,  was 
impressed  by  the  newspaper  discussion  and  was  in 
fluenced  also  by  certain  members  of  his  Cabinet  who 
were  inclined  to  revision.  He  was  disposed  to  take  up 
the  question  in  his  annual  message,  and  was  prepared 
to  issue  a  call  for  a  special  session  of  Congress  after  the 
fourth  of  March,  but  before  acting  he  sought  the  ad 
vice  of  some  of  the  "  elder  statesmen."  Senator  Platt 
was  invited  to  the  White  House.  He  went  there  with  a 
friend,  and  the  President  told  him  what  he  had  in  mind. 
He  listened  patiently  till  the  President  had  concluded 
and  then,  leaving  his  chair  and  pacing  the  floor,  he  gave 
the  reasons  why  in  his  judgment  the  tariff  should  not  be 
disturbed  at  that  time.  As  to  the  impression  made 
upon  the  mind  of  the  Executive,  we  have  only  the  in 
ferences  to  be  drawn  from  a  letter  which,  on  his  return 
to  Connecticut,  Mr.  Platt  wrote  to  an  associate  on  the 
Finance  Committee: 

I  saw  the  President  when  I  was  in  Washington,  and  he 
is  going  to  simply  say  in  his  message  that  he  will  call  the 
25 


386  Orville  H.  Platt 

attention  of  Congress  to  the  tariff  question  later.  His 
mind,  I  judge,  is  pretty  fully  made  up  to  the  policy  of 
having  a  joint  commission,  to  be  composed  of  members  of 
the  Committee  on  Ways  and  Means  and  Finance  Committee, 
appointed  to  consider  the  subject,  with  a  view  to  reporting 
to  an  extra  session  to  be  called  perhaps  in  September.  I 
did  not  talk  with  him  very  much  on  the  subject.  What 
I  did  say  was  that  I  could  not  see  any  necessity  for  an  extra 
session,  and  that  it  seemed  to  me  that  the  tariff  is  well 
enough  as  it  is.  ...  He  admitted  that  he  did  not  think 
there  was  any  necessity  for  it  except  a  political  necessity, 
and  that  he  believed  that  this  sentiment  is  much  stronger 
than  I  suppose  it  is ;  that  if  we  do  not  meet  it,  it  will  grow 
stronger  and  stronger  until  finally  it  will  get  the  upper 
hand.  That  is  about  what  I  came  away  on.  .  .  .  You 
know  as  well  as  I,  that  a  joint  commission  composed  as 
suggested,  would  be  entirely  valueless,  so  far  as  getting  our 
ideas  accepted  is  concerned,  if  they  differed  from  the  ideas 
of  the  members  of  the  Ways  and  Means  Committee.  We 
would  be  placed  in  a  very  humiliating  position,  and  it  is 
far  better,  in  my  judgment,  to  let  the  Ways  and  Means 
Committee  formulate  its  own  bill,  whatever  it  may  be, 
and  then  let  us  consider  it  when  it  comes  over  to  us,  as 
we  have  always  considered  such  questions.  I  do  not  be 
lieve  Payne  or  the  members  of  the  Ways  and  Means  Com 
mittee  of  the  House  would  consent  to  anything  else,  but  I 
do  not  know.  If  they  did,  I  know  it  would  mean  that  we 
should  sit  and  struggle  all  through  the  summer  months, 
with  no  agreement  except  such  as  might  be  reached  by  our 
falling  in  with  their  wishes,  and  when  it  came  over  to  the 
Senate,  if  objected  to,  as  it  would  surely  be  by  a  large 
number  of  our  colleagues,  we  would  simply  be  charged 
with  having  sacrificed  their  interests.  I  do  not  think  it 
will  work. 

He  did  not  content  himself  with  an  oral  argument 
to    persuade  the  Executive  of   the  inadvisability  of 


Against  Tariff  Revision  387 

reopening  the  tariff  question.  It  was  a  subject  upon 
which  he  held  profound  convictions,  and  immediately 
upon  his  arrival  home  he  prepared  a  letter  to  the  Presi 
dent  reinforcing  what  he  had  already  said.  The  force 
and  lucidity  of  his  statement  do  not  suffer  from  the  lapse 
of  time,  or  in  consideration  of  events  four  years  later, 
when  Congress  was  called  together  to  do  that  which 
Roosevelt's  better  second  thought  condemned : 

WASHINGTON,  CONNECTICUT,  November  21,  1904. 
DEAR  MR.  PRESIDENT: 

Since  seeing  you  on  Friday,  I  have  been  thinking  about 
this  matter  of  tariff  re-adjustment  and  I  want  to  put  the 
result  of  my  thought  on  paper. 

First, — I  am  firmly  of  the  opinion  that  a  general  tariff 
revision  is  unnecessary  and  would  prove  disastrous  to  the 
business  interests  of  the  country.  No  Republican  that 
I  know  of  has  advocated  a  general  revision.  It  could 
not  be  undertaken  and  consummated  without  throwing 
the  whole  business  and  financial  relations  of  the  country 
into  a  state  of  uncertainty,  and  if  it  were  understood  that 
such  a  thing  were  contemplated,  the  uncertainty  would 
begin  from  the  present  moment,  continue  all  through  the 
consideration  of  the  subject,  and  long  after  its  final  con 
clusion.  To  attempt  to  make  a  new  Tariff  bill  throughout, 
would,  in  my  judgment,  be  a  piece  of  egregious  folly. 

Second, — I  do  not  admit  from  the  standpoint  of  the 
business  interests  of  the  country  and  its  prosperity,  the 
necessity  for  making  any  changes  or  amendments  in  rates. 
The  tariff  is  well  enough  as  it  is ;  it  is  largely  to  be  credited 
with  our  wonderful  prosperity  and  present  impregnable 
business  position,  but  if  it  be  true  that  there  is  a  sentiment 
for  changes  in  tariff  rates  which  must  be  placated,  then, 
I  insist  that  such  changes  should  be  few  and  moderate.  I 
do  not  agree  that  there  is  any  general  sentiment  such  as  I 
have  named.  There  is  a  free-trade  sentiment,  stimulated 


388  Orville  H.  Platt 

by  Democratic  leaders  and  newspapers,  and  there  have 
always  been  protectionists  who,  as  soon  as  a  protective 
tariff  has  redeemed  the  country  and  put  it  in  a  prosperous 
condition,  have,  for  some  reason,  been  ready  to  fall  in 
with  the  idea  that  duties  ought  to  be  reduced.  I  think  the 
extent  of  this  sentiment  among  Republicans  has  been  and 
is,  vastly  overestimated.  Personally,  I  would  sooner  under 
take  to  show  why  the  tariff  should  be  let  alone,  than  to 
fall  into  the  spirit  which  favors  any  change.  But,  if  we 
must  take  it  up,  what  shall  be  done,  and  how  shall  it  be 
done? 

Third, — I  think  that  any  changes  or  amendments  which 
it  may  be  supposed  we  must,  for  political  reasons,  make,  can 
be  better  made  in  the  natural  and  ordinary  way  than  by 
the  appointment  of  any  commission,  or  the  calling  of  any 
extra  session.  By  the  natural  and  ordinary  way,  I  mean 
that  the  Committee  on  Ways  and  Means  should  propose  by 
way  of  amendment  to  the  existing  law,  the  changes  which 
it  is  supposed  we  must,  for  political  reasons,  make.  If  the 
members  of  that  Committee  desired  informal  consultations 
with  members  of  the  Finance  Committee  of  the  Senate,  there 
would  be  no  difficulty  in  having  them.  Once  made,  these 
changes  could  be  passed  through  the  House  at  the  short 
or  a  regular  long  session  without  exhaustive  debate,  and 
could  be  considered  in  the  Senate,  and  if  agreed  to,  passed 
there  without  lengthy  interference  with  the  regular  busi 
ness  of  the  session — then  the  whole  matter  would  be  over. 
I  think  perhaps  there  is  a  general  consensus  of  opinion 
that  the  duties  on  the  coarser  forms  of  iron  and  steel 
might  be  reduced  without  harm,  but  the  moment  you  step 
outside  of  that,  the  different  sections  of  the  country  will 
come  into  direct  conflict.  This  picayune  matter  of  free 
hides  would  be  a  storm  centre  in  which  the  East  and  West, 
or  rather  Boston  and  the  West,  would  be  fighting  a  bitter 
battle — so  with  lumber,  so  with  wood  pulp,  so  with  every 
other  article  with  which  I  have  heard  changes  suggested — 
still,  if  the  battle  must  be  fought,  it,  in  my  opinion,  can  be 


Against  Tariff  Revision  389 

fought  in  the  regular  way  I  have  suggested,  with  less  of 
regret  when  it  is  over,  than  by  any  commission  or  extra 
session  method. 

Fourth, — A  commission  composed  of  members  of  the 
House  and  Senate  Committees  to  sit  through  the  summer, 
would  practically  be  obliged  to  hear  and  consider  every 
proposed  or  contemplated  change  in  the  tariff,  and  that 
would  involve  the  whole.  I  believe  that  a  joint  commis 
sion,  such  as  is  suggested,  would  simply  develop  and  em 
phasize  the  antagonism  which  is  supposed  to  exist  between 
the  two  Houses.  The  House  claims,  and  it  has  the  right,  to 
originate  such  measures.  It  seeks  every  opportunity  to 
declare  the  fact  that  it  does  not  propose  to  be  dictated 
to  or  advised  by  the  Senate  in  any  matter  which  is  thus 
within  its  own  exclusive  jurisdiction,  and  if  such  a  com 
mission  met,  the  House  members  would  inevitably  assume 
the  right  to  determine  what  should  be  done,  and  from  the 
first  the  Senate  members  of  that  commission  would  either 
be  placed  in  a  position  of  acquiescence  simply,  or  charged 
with  interference  in  a  matter  in  which,  primarily,  they 
had  no  right  to  be  heard.  Mr.  Aldrich  and  Mr.  Payne,  the 
chairmen,  can  sit  down  and  talk  about  such  matters  in 
their  own  rooms  at  the  hotel  without  developing  antagon 
ism,  but  the  moment  such  a  commission  undertook  to  deal 
with  any  particular  item  of  the  tariff,  and  the  House  mem 
bers  proposed  certain  action  which  the  Senate  members 
might  say  they  thought  inadvisable,  the  old  antagonism, 
which  you  understand,  I  think,  would  be  developed.  But, 
admit,  if  you  please,  that  they  would  work  together  in  har 
mony  and  peace,  which  I  do  not  believe,  then,  as  I  have 
said,  every  application  for  any  change  in  any  item  of  the 
tariff,  and  that  would  embrace  the  whole  list,  made  to  the 
commission,  would  have  to  be  considered,  or  it  would  have 
to  decide  at  once  that  it  would  only  deal  with  a  few  of  the 
items  of  the  different  schedules.  It  would  be  exceed 
ingly  difficult  to  mark  out  the  line  of  limitation.  Little 
by  little,  the  list  to  be  considered  would  be  enlarged,  until 


390  Orville  H.  Platt 

finally,  it  would  come  to  the  consideration  of  an  entire  change 
of  the  Tariff  law — a  new  bill,  which  would  be  named  after 
the  Chairman  of  the  House  Committee,  and  called  the 
"Payne  bill."  I  do  not  believe  that  you  know  exactly 
what  that  would  mean,  as  one  who  has  been  through  it 
several  times  does,  but  we  all  agree  that  it  would  mean 
a  general  upset  of  the  business  of  the  country. 

Fifth, — As  I  have  said,  an  extra  session  seems  to  me 
allowable  only  upon  the  theory  that  such  changes  as  are 
necessary  to  be  made  (for  political  effect  merely — mind 
you)  cannot  be  made  at  a  regular  session  or  in  the  regular 
way.  If  the  idea  of  a  joint  commission  should  prevail, 
and  the  result  of  the  work  of  that  commission  should,  as  I 
believe  it  surely  would,  be  a  recommendation  for  a  new 
Tariff  bill,  then  I  can  see  that  an  extra  session  might'  be 
desirable  in  order  to  get  it  out  of  the  way  as  quickly  as 
possible,  but  this  above  all  things  else,  I  deprecate.  In 
deed,  the  only  argument  in  favor  of  an  extra  session  is, 
that  there  is  going  to  be  such  a  vital  change  in  the  Tariff 
law  that  we  must  have  time  to  get  over  the  consequences 
of  it  before  the  next  election.  In  other  words,  the  calling 
of  an  extra  session  presupposes  that  there  will  be  an  entire 
revision  of  the  tariff.  It  seems  to  me  that  what  changes 
are  to  be  made,  and  as  I  have  already  said,  they  should 
be  few  and  moderate,  should  be  proposed  in  the  regular 
way  that  I  have  suggested,  and  disposed  of  in  the  regular 
way.  We  do  not  want  any  spectacular  readjustment  of  the 
tariff.  We  cannot  afford  to  have  twelve  months  of  uncer 
tain,  dull  times,  with  laborers  out  of  employment,  and 
discontent  generated.  I  think  it  would  be  better  to  take 
the  stand  at  once  that  the  present  Tariff  law  in  most  of  its 
features  is  wise  and  satisfactory;  that  the  Committee  on 
Ways  and  Means  of  the  House  will  carefully  consider  in 
what  respects  it  needs  amendment  and  will  present  its  con 
clusions  to  the  House  in  the  form  of  bills  to  effect  that 
purpose,  to  be  considered  either  at  this  present  session, 
if  they  can  be  formulated  in  time  (and  if  work  is  begun 


Against  Tariff  Revision  391 

immediately  I  think  they  can  be)  or  at  the  December 
session.  It  grows  on  me  more  and  more  that  it  would  be 
disastrous  to  throw  this  entire  country  into  the  vortex  of 
agitation  over  a  general  revision  of  the  Tariff  law.  This  is 
the  way  it  looks  to  me. 

Very  truly  yours, 

O.  H.  PLATT. 

With  his  friends  in  Connecticut  he  also  corresponded 
along  similar  lines.  One  of  them  wrote  him  sapiently : 
"  There  should  be  a  careful  study  of  our  tariff  law,  and 
such  revision  as  changed  conditions  warrant  should  be 
promptly  made."  To  this  suggestion  he  replied: 

Do  you  really  appreciate  what  is  meant  by  a  revision 
of  the  tariff?  What  do  you  think  ought  to  be  changed  in 
the  tariff?  I  think  it  is  a  pretty  good  tariff  as  it  is  and 
that  this  talk  about  tariff  revision  is  rather  sentimental 
than  otherwise.  ...  I  confess  that  I  do  not  know  in  what 
respect  the  tariff  ought  to  be  changed,  and  I  have  given  the 
matter  a  good  deal  of  study.  I  am  quite  sure  that  the 
idea  of  tariff  revision  would  inaugurate  contention  and 
sectional  differences  which  would  go  a  great  deal  further 
toward  breaking  up  Republican  harmony  and  interfering 
with  Republican  success,  than  letting  things  alone  would. 
If  you  know  of  anything  on  which  the  tariff  ought  to  be 
changed,  or  any  one  else  does,  such  change  can  be  made  in 
the  natural  ordinary  way,  by  amendment,  but  I  think  that 
a  spectacular  revision  of  the  tariff  would  be  most  disastrous. 
I  do  not  mean  by  this  that  if  any  one  can  show  me  an  item 
which  ought  to  be  reduced  or  which  ought  to  be  increased, 
I  am  not  entirely  willing  to  do  what  I  can  in  that  direction, 
but  I  see  no  necessity  for  a  complete  revision  of  the 
tariff,  and  I  do  not  believe  that  the  people  who  are  talking 
about  it  can  show  such  a  necessity. 

To  others  he  explained  that  while  it  might  be  deemed 
wise,  if  not  necessary,  to  make  some  amendments  to 


392  Orville  H.  Platt 

the  Tariff  law,  personally,  and  from  a  business  and 
economic  standpoint,  he  thought  it  was  entirely  un 
necessary.  He  recognized  that  there  was  undoubtedly 
a  sentiment  in  the  country  that  there  should  be  some 
changes.  The  duty  on  many  articles  was  greater  than 
was  necessary  for  the  protection  of  the  industry.  It 
was  hard  to  make  people  believe  that  when  this  was 
an  acknowledged  fact,  it  did  not  give  opportunity  for 
manufacturers  and  especially  trusts,  to  make  exorbi 
tant  and  unconscionable  profits.  Personally  he  did 
not  believe  this  to  be  true.  He  wrote : 

I  do  not  believe  that  an  unnecessarily  high  duty  exerts 
any  influence  whatever  upon  prices.  If  there  is  a  demand 
for  the  goods  or  articles,  the  price  will  be  good.  If  the 
demand  exceeds  the  supply,  the  price  will  be  abnormal. 
If  the  demand  falls  off  and  the  supply  exceeds  the  demand, 
the  price  will  be  normal,  or  indeed,  abnormally  low,  but 
it  is  the  most  difficult  thing  in  the  world  to  make  people 
understand  this,  and  even  men  who  have  called  themselves 
protectionists  are  carried  away  with  the  idea  that  high 
rates  of  duty  are  stimulating  to  the  trusts,  and  the  trusts 
are  oppressing  the  people. 

But  he  hit  the  real  secret  of  the  clamor  for  revision 
when  he  said : 

The  Republican  newspaper  demand  for  it,  I  think,  comes 
largely  from  a  desire  to  have  the  duty  taken  off  from  wood 
pulp  and  printing  paper.  It  is  the  old  story — a  man 
wants  his  article  free  and  the  duty  on  every  one  else's. 
They  cannot  see  that  protection  is  a  system  which,  if 
it  is  to  be  applied,  should  be  applied  so  as  to  protect  every 
industry. 

The  "  dumping  "  question  gave  him  some  concern  as 
a  political  consideration.  He  acknowledged  that  the 


Against  Tariff  Revision  393 

strongest  argument  he  had  heard  was  that  manufac 
turers  were  selling  goods  to  foreigners  at  a  less  price 
than  they  were  charging  in  the  home  market.  But  he 
explained : 

No  revision  of  the  tariff  which  still  left  a  protective  mar 
gin  could  prevent  that,  and  I  am  by  no  means  certain  that 
it  is  not  a  good  thing  to  have  it  done.  We  want  a  foreign 
market  for  our  goods,  and  the  foreign  market  cannot  be 
established  except  by  sales  at  cost  or  under  cost.  A 
prudent  manufacturer,  seeking  to  establish  a  foreign  mar 
ket,  might  well  make  concessions  for  the  purpose  of  intro 
ducing  his  goods  which  would  leave  him  no  profit.  Now, 
I  take  it,  no  one  proposes  to  make  such  a  tariff  that  a  man 
cannot  have  some  profit  on  what  he  manufactures,  so  that 
I  do  not  see  that  any  radical  reduction  in  the  tariff  duties, 
there  still  being  a  protective  margin,  would  in  any  way 
cure  or  lessen  the  evil,  if  it  is  one,  of  selling  goods  abroad 
at  cheaper  rates  than  we  sell  them  in  the  home  market, 
and  when  you  come  to  think  of  it,  what  a  foolish  thing  it 
would  be  for  Germany  or  England,  or  any  of  our  competi 
tors,  to  pass  a  law  providing  that  their  manufacturers  should 
not  sell  their  goods  in  America  cheaper  than  in  Germany 
or  England. 

With  the  Boston  cry  for  reciprocity  with  Canada  he 
had  no  patience.  That  was  a  proposition  which  in 
existing  circumstances,  he  regarded  as  utterly  im 
practicable.  To  Wharton  Barker  of  Philadelphia,  he 
wrote  on  December  5,  1904: 

I  do  not  think  that  outside  of  Boston  there  is  in  New 
England  any  considerable  sentiment  one  way  or  the  other 
with  reference  to  what  is  called  "Canadian  reciprocity." 
I  certainly  have  never  heard  it  mentioned  in  Connecticut 
as  a  matter  especially  desirable.  I  am  a  little  surprised 
at  the  Boston  craze.  They  seem  to  take  it  for  granted  there 


394  Orville  H.  Platt 

that  Canadian  reciprocity  is  something  which  the  United 
States  can  promote  and  accomplish  all  by  itself,  and  that 
any  kind  of  reciprocal  trade  arrangement  would  be  to 
the  advantage  of  Boston.  My  understanding,  though  of 
course  I  may  be  mistaken,  is  that  Canada  has  no  desire  to 
make  any  reciprocal  arrangement  with  us — and  it  takes 
two  to  make  a  bargain.  So  much  for  the  present  talk  about 
Canadian  reciprocity.  Until  it  be  ascertained  that  Canada 
is  ready  to  treat  with  us  on  that  subject,  it  is  simply  an 
academic  proposition,  and  I  do  not  think  that  it  will  be 
developed.  What  I  have  said  with  regard  to  Canadian 
reciprocity,  so-called,  applies  with  equal  force  to  the  ques 
tion  of  a  more  complete  commercial  union.  The  answer 
to  it  is  that  Canada  does  not  take  kindly  to  any  such  proposi 
tion,  and  it  is  useless  for  the  United  States  to  attempt  to 
force  it  upon  Canada.  When  Sir  Wilfrid  Laurier  and  the 
people  who  with  him  control  the  political  destinies  of 
Canada  are  ready  to  take  up  either  partial  or  complete 
reciprocal  trade  arrangements,  it  may  be  worth  while  to 
discuss  what  would  be  of  advantage  to  the  United  States 
— a  pretty  broad  subject,  by  the  way — but  so  long  as  they 
are  hostile  to  anything  of  the  sort,  I  do  not  think  that  we 
will  gain  anything  by  agitating  it. 

So  he  held  his  course  without  deviation,  until  as  he 
had  predicted,  the  cry  for  tariff  revision  was  lost  in  the 
louder  cry  for  regulation  of  railroad  rates.  He  had 
attained  his  purpose,  and  it  was  due  to  his  influence 
more  than  to  any  other,  that  the  Dingley  law  was  not 
wantonly  supplanted  at  that  time. 


CHAPTER  XXX 

ANTIQUATED  SENATE  WAYS 

The  Rules  of  the  Senate — Advocates  Open  Executive  Sessions — 
Speech  of  April   13,    1886 — Proposes  Limitation  of  Debate. 

MR.  PLATT  was  as  little  of  an  inconoclast  as  any 
man  who  ever  sat  in  the  United  States  Senate. 
His  respect  for  custom  and  tradition  was  ingrained. 
He  was  instinctively  conservative,  yet  it  was  his  strik 
ing  characteristic  that  as  he  advanced  in  years  he 
progressed  in  intellectual  flexibility,  adapting  himself 
with  marked  facility  to  the  enlarged  requirements  of 
an  expanding  people.  His  was  always  an  inquiring 
mind;  with  all  his  natural  respect  for  authority,  he 
refused  to  subscribe  to  its  demands  until  convinced 
of  valid  reasons.  No  precedent  could  claim  his  alle 
giance  without  due  presentation  of  credentials.  His 
first  consideration  always  was  for  the  practical,  and 
theories  were  useless  which  could  not  be  enforced. 
The  standing  rules  of  the  Senate  he  did  not  regard 
as  in  themselves  a  §acred  writing,  but  merely  as  a 
means  adapted  to  an  end,  and  when  they  failed  to 
fill  the  measure  of  what  he  thought  to  be  the  Senate's 
need,  he  did  not  hesitate  to  urge  a  change.  He  had 
not  been  in  the  Senate  long  before  the  grotesque  in 
congruity  of  the  executive  session  fetich  dawned  upon 
him.  Even  in  those  days  the  executive  session  was 
a  byword  and  reproach,  the  ban  of  secrecy  yielding 

395 


396  Orville  H.  Platt 

to  the  first  gentle  touch  of  the  reporter's  wand,  yet 
in  many  years  there  had  not  been  a  serious  suggestion 
in  the  Senate  that  the  useless  rule  be  changed.  In 
1841,  William  Allen  of  Ohio  introduced  a  resolution 
for  open  sessions,  which  was  promptly  laid  on  the 
table;  he  renewed  it  subsequently  three  times  without 
success.  In  1853  Salmon  P.  Chase  submitted  a  reso 
lution  abolishing  secret  sessions,  and  Charles  Sumner 
urged  its  adoption.  In  the  following  session  the  resolu 
tion  was  renewed  and  laid  on  the  table.  That  was  all. 
There  was  therefore  little  encouragement  for  persis 
tence  in  this  line  of  endeavor,  yet  Mr.  Platt  in  January, 
1886,  gave  the  Senate  another  opportunity  to  mend 
its  ways.  It  was  in  the  first  year  of  President  Cleve 
land's  administration,  and  the  notorious  character  of 
some  of  his  nominations,  subject  to  confirmation  by  the 
Senate  behind  closed  doors,  gave  pertinency  to  Mr. 
Platt 's  proposal.  On  January  29,  1886,  he  submitted 
a  resolution  which  was  promptly  reported  adversely 
by  the  Committee  on  Rules,  and  which,  as  afterwards 
modified  by  him,  read  as  follows : 

Resolved,  That  executive  nominations  shall  hereafter  be 
considered  and  acted  upon  in  open  session  except  when 
otherwise  ordered  by  vote  of  the  Senate.  And  so  much 
of  Section  2,  Rule  xxxvi.,  and  Section  2,  Rule  xxxvm. 
of  the  standing  rules  of  the  Senate  as  conflicts  with  or  is 
inconsistent  with  the  above  is  to  the  extent  of  such  in 
consistency  rescinded. 

Upon  this  resolution  on  April  i3th,  he  delivered  a 
carefully  prepared  speech,  although  the  hopelessness 
of  action  was  apparent.  This  speech  revealed  a  great 
deal  of  research  into  the  records  of  the  Senate  from 
the  beginning  of  the  Government,  and  demonstrated 


Antiquated  Senate  Ways  397 

that  the  rule  of  secrecy  could  not  claim  the  sanction 
of  the  founders  of  the  Republic,  that  the  departure  from 
early  methods  had  been  in  the  line  of  .greater  strict 
ness  and  in  the  line  of  inflicting  penalties  for  disclosure. 
He  admitted  that  whatever  secrecy  was  implied  from 
closed  doors  existed  at  the  beginning  of  the  Govern 
ment,  but  he  denied  that  any  more  existed  than  was 
thus  implied: 

That  any  greater  secrecy  existed  in  relation  to  the  con 
sideration  of  executive  business  than  existed  with  the 
consideration  of  legislative  business  while  the  Senate  sat 
with  closed  doors,  I  deny.  It  was  not  until  1800,  eleven 
years  after  the  Senate  commenced  its  sessions  and  six 
years  after  the  doors  were  opened  for  legislative  business, 
that  any  rule  of  secrecy  was  applied  to  any  kind  of  business 
transacted  in  executive  session.  So  whatever  secrecy  the 
fathers  observed  for  six  years  after  the  Senate  was  opened 
as  to  legislative  business  was  the  same  secrecy  with  regard 
to  executive  business  that  they  had  at  first  adopted  with 
regard  to  legislative  business  and  no  more. 

He  showed  by  references  to  history,  that  even  in 
the  Continental  Congress  which  sat  with  closed  doors, 
and  in  the  legislative  sessions  of  the  Senate,  which 
for  the  first  five  years  were  held  with  closed  doors, 
no  rigid  secrecy  was  maintained.  Having  demolished 
the  historical  argument  he  made  an  earnest  plea  for 
publicity.  Secrecy  he  declared  to  be  a  relic  of  mon 
archical  power  and  privilege,  a  lineal  descendant  of 
the  privy  council.  With  open  sessions  he  asserted 
bad  men  would  not  be  presented  to  the  Senate  for 
discussion : 

The  incompetent  will  not  be  presented  here  for  us  to 
discuss  as  they  are  now  presented,  if  it  be  understood  that 
their  characters  and  qualifications  are  open  to  public 


398  Orville  H.  Platt 

discussion,  and  are  to  receive  public  consideration.  The 
whole  business  of  appointing  men  to  office  will  change. 
We  shall  have  fewer  recommendations  of  bad  men,  fewer 
nominations  of  bad  men,  fewer  confirmations  of  bad  men, 
if  publicity  can  attend  the  whole  business  of  office-seeking 
and  office-getting  from  the  White  House  to  the  Senate. 

Moreover,  he  declared  as  the  result  of  some  years' 
experience : 

I  affirm  now  that  I  never  have  heard  a  word  said  in 
executive  session  which  ought  to  have  been  said  there,  or 
which  any  person  thought  ought  to  have  been  said  there, 
which  might  not  just  as  well  and  just  as  appropriately  have 
been  said  in  open  session  in  relation  to  the  confirmation 
of  nominations. 

Public  sentiment,  he  asserted,  demanded  the  adop 
tion  of  the  rule.  Out  of  nearly  14,000  newspapers, 
10,000  had  declared  their  belief  that  the  measure  should 
be  adopted.  "The  country  newspapers,  which  repre 
sent  the  real  sentiment  of  the  country,  which  go  where 
the  minister  and  the  schoolmaster  do  not  enter,  and 
where  the  voice  of  the  Senate  does  not  otherwise  go" 
had  declared  in  favor  of  the  measure : 

Whence  arises  this  demand?  It  is  not  idle  curiosity. 
It  is  not  that  a  few  reporters  may  look  in  on  these  proceed 
ings  and  send  the  news  to  the  journals  which  they  represent. 
Oh,  no ;  that  is  not  it.  It  is  the  desire  of  the  people  for  a 
better  administration  of  the  government.  It  is  a  desire 
of  the  people  that  the  standard  of  official  life  and  char 
acter  shall  be  elevated ;  and  they  know  the  only  way  to  do 
it  is  by  having  the  qualifications  of  men  discussed  openly 
in  the  Senate  chamber. 

He  had  a  more  convincing  argument : 

But,  Mr.  President,  there  is  no  secrecy.  We  are  hugging 
an  old  custom  for  its  name  rather  than  for  its  actual 


Antiquated  Senate  Ways  399 

results.  We  are  pinning  the  Senate  to  the  skirts  of  an 
ancient  tradition  which,  as  to  any  useful  result,  is  sterile 
and  barren.  There  is  no  secrecy  possible.  There  never 
has  been  any  secrecy  possible  in  any  matter  about  which 
the  public  desired  information  that  took  place  in  executive 
session.  I  do  not  say  how  much  or  how  little,  or  whether 
any  at  all,  of  the  reports  which  we  see  from  day  to  day  in 
the  newspapers  published  after  each  executive  session  is 
true,  but  I  think  I  am  justified,  without  revealing  any 
secrets  of  executive  session,  without  doing  what  the  Senator 
from  Vermont  intimated  in  his  colloquy  the  other  day 
with  the  Senator  from  Kentucky  was  done — violating  a 
senatorial  oath  and  becoming  guilty  of  senatorial  perjury — 
I  believe  I  may  say  that  the  secrets  of  this  body  are  to  a 
greater  or  less  degree  exposed  and  disclosed.  Mixed  they 
may  be  with  untruth,  mixed  they  may  be  with  the  fertile 
imagination  of  the  newspaper  reporter,  nevertheless  no 
Senator  will  deny  me  in  saying  that  more  or  less  of  what 
occurs  in  executive  session  is  disclosed.  It  is  disclosed 
either  by  Senators  or  by  the  officers  of  the  Senate,  and  when 
I  say  that  I  do  not  mean  to  cast  the  slightest  suspicion  upon 
the  officers  of  the  Senate.  I  do  not  want  to  be  in  a  body 
where  I  am  subjected  to  the  suspicion  of  dishonorable  dis 
closure.  We  are  a  class  here,  as  lawyers,  as  clergymen,  as 
bank  presidents,  and  as  business  men  are  a  class ;  and  when 
one  does  a  thing  that  is  discreditable  we  all  suffer.  .  .  . 

What  a  farce  it  is,  Mr.  President.  The  whole  community, 
the  world,  are  laughing  at  us  that  we  pretend  to  have 
secret  sessions.  We  ourselves  would  be  infinitely  better 
off  if  every  word  that  is  said  here  were  known  to  the  re 
motest  portion  of  the  globe  than  with  the  pretended  publi 
cations  of  what  we  do  and  say  mixed  up  with  the 
imagination  of  reporters  and  the  untruthfulness  which 
accompanies  the  reports. 

It  was  not  to  be  expected  that  the  Senate  would 
change  its  immemorial  practice,  and  no  action  was 


400  Orville  H.  Platt 

ever  taken  on  the  resolution  after  its  rejection  by 
the  Committee  on  Rules.  Public  interest  died  away 
and  has  never  been  revived  in  anything  like  the  same 
degree.  There  have  been  spasmodic  attempts  on  the 
part  of  the  Senate  to  enforce  the  rule  of  secrecy  by 
conducting  farcical  investigations  into  the  manner 
in  which  the  proceedings  of  executive  sessions  have 
been  divulged,  but  public  sentiment  apparently  has 
settled  into  a  contented  acceptance  of  the  inevitable, 
satisfied  in  the  knowledge  that  the  proceedings  of  so- 
called  secret  sessions  are,  in  effect,  as  widely  published 
as  any  other  proceedings  of  the  Senate. 

Mr.  Platt  did  not  disturb  the  serenity  of  the  Senate 
again  in  regard  to  its  rules  until  the  time  arrived  when, 
in  his  judgment,  as  in  the  judgment  of  many  other 
Senators,  the  practice  of  interminable  debate  had 
passed  all  reasonable  bounds. 

In  the  first  session  of  the  Fifty-first  Congress,  the 
Elections  bill,  sometimes  called  the  Force  bill,  was  pre 
vented  from  coming  to  a  vote  by  the  dilatory  tactics 
of  the  Democratic  minority  under  the  lead  of  Arthur 
P.  Gorman.  The  McKinley  Tariff  bill  narrowly  escaped 
a  like  fate.  While  the  minority  were  thus  engaged  in 
pressing  to  the  limit  of  endurance  their  privilege  of 
unlimited  debate,  the  leaders  of  the  majority  were 
groping  for  a  remedy.  Some  form  of  closure  seemed 
indispensable,  but  it  was  not  easy  to  devise  a  practical 
amendment  to  the  rules.  Mr.  Hoar  submitted  an 
amendment  providing  for  a  vote  upon  questions  before 
the  Senate  under  certain  conditions,  within  a  reason 
able  time.  Mr.  Platt  considered  the  introduction  of 
an  amendment  to  the  same  end,  and  so  did  others. 
All  propositions  were  referred  to  the  Committee  on 
Rules,  but  nothing  was  done  about  them  during  the 


Antiquated  Senate  Ways  401 

first  session  of  the  Congress,  although  there  was  more 
or  less  debate.  The  Tariff  bill  was  enacted;  the  Elec 
tions  bill  went  over  with  the  understanding  that  it 
was  to  be  taken  up  during  the  short  session.  The 
Democratic  victory  at  the  fall  elections,  insuring  a  Demo 
cratic  House  after  March  4th,  did  not  incline  the  Demo 
crats  of  the  Senate  to  forego  during  the  short  session, 
any  of  the  advantages  they  held  under  the  rules,  and 
it  was  evident  that  the  Elections  bill,  which  had  the 
right  of  way,  could  not  become  a  law  before  the  end 
of  the  Congress,  in  spite  of  the  persistency  with  which 
it  was  pressed  by  Mr.  Hoar,  the  Chairman  of  the  Com 
mittee  having  it  in  charge.  On  December  29th,  accord 
ingly,  Mr.  Aldrich,  Chairman  of  the  Committee  on 
Rules,  and  even  then  beginning  to  receive  recognition 
as  the  leader  of  the  Senate,  submitted  an  amendment, 
based  on  the  amendment  drawn  by  Mr.  Hoar,  and 
operative  by  its  terms  only  ''during  the  remainder 
of  this  session. "  It  was  debated  religiously  for  several 
days  and  then,  since  it  evidently  stood  as  little  chance 
of  reaching  a  vote  as  the  Elections  bill  itself,  it  quietly 
disappeared  among  the  mists  of  "unfinished  business. " 
The  next  heard  in  the  Senate  of  the  proposal  to 
limit  debate  was  during  the  long  summer  filibuster  of 
1893,  when  the  endeavors  of  the  free-silver  Senators, 
to  prevent  a  vote  on  the  Sherman  law  repeal,  sorely 
tried  the  patience  of  the  Senate  and  the  people.  As 
soon  as  the  Democratic  intention  became  manifest 
Republican  leaders  began  to  figure  on  some  device 
to  thwart  it,  and  again  the  practicability  of  closure 
entered  into  their  consultations.  Mr.  Platt  especially 
was  in  earnest.  When  Democratic  Senators  refrained 
from  voting,  for  the  obvious  purpose  of  breaking  a 
quorum,  he  lectured  them  roundly  for  their  neglect 
26 


402  Orville  H.  Platt 

of  duty,  and  their  disregard  for  the  obligations  of 
their  office.  On  October  i3th,  after  the  country  had 
been  treated  to  the  unseemly  spectacle  for  weeks  he 
broke  out  hotly  against  Senator  Teller  who  had  frankly 
asserted  his  privilege  to  decline  to  answer  on  a  roll- 
call  whenever  the  minority  thought  it  necessary  to 
resort  to  obstructive  tactics.  He  declared: 

I  cannot  assent  to  the  very  remarkable  position  which 
the  Senator  from  Colorado  has  taken,  which,  if  I  understand 
it,  is  in  plain  words  this:  That  if  he  does  not  like  proposed 
legislation,  he  will  not  only  violate  his  constitutional  duty, 
but,  as  it  seems  to  me,  his  constitutional  oath. 

The  rules  of  the  Senate  require  that  every  Senator  shall 
vote  unless  excused,  and  they  require  that  absent  Senators 
shall  be  brought  here,  that  their  attendance  shall  be  com 
pelled,  and,  when  compelled,  the  rules  require  that  they 
shall  vote,  unless  excused. 

I  supposed  when  I  swore  to  support  the  Constitution 
and  to  discharge  the  duties  of  a  Senator,  that  a  constitutional 
duty  rested  upon  me  to  observe  the  rules  of  the  Senate. 

The  Constitution  provides  for  the  rules  of  the  Senate, 
and  yet  we  hear,  and  hear  I  think  for  the  first  time  in  the 
history  of  the  Senate,  the  deliberate  statement  made  by 
a  Senator  that  he  will  not  observe  the  rules  of  the  Senate, 
because  he  is  in  a  minority  and  does  not  want  the  majority 
legislation  to  pass.  It  is  one  of  the  things  which  is  fast 
bringing  the  Senate  into  disgrace  in  the  United  States.  .  .  . 

I  do  not  see  how  any  Senator  can  sit  in  his  seat  when  the 
roll  is  called  and  not  answer  to  his  name.  I  remember 
when  I  first  came  to  the  Senate,  in  the  session  of  1879,  in 
the  heat  of  party  strife  one  evening,  in  common  with  other 
Senators,  I  did  refuse  to  answer  to  my  name  when  the  roll 
was  called,  but,  upon  reflection,  I  made  up  my  mind  that 
I  never  should  again,  and  I  think  I  have  never  under 
any  state  of  excitement  done  it  since  that  time.  If  I 


Antiquated  Senate  Ways  403 

have,  it  has  been  in  my  judgment  wrong  and  it  cannot  be 
defended. 

Prior  to  this  outburst  he  had  introduced  an  amend 
ment  providing  for  closure,  which,  for  palpable  reasons, 
was  never  brought  to  a  vote.1 

In  addressing  the  Senate  in  its  support  two  days 
after  presenting  it,  he  declared: 

We  as  a  Senate  are  fast  losing  the  respect  of  the  people 
of  the  United  States.  We  are  fast  being  considered  a  body 
that  exists  for  the  purpose  of  retarding  and  obstructing 
legislation.  We  are  being  compared  in  the  minds  of  the 
people  of  this  country  to  the  House  of  Lords  in  England, 
and  the  reason  for  it  is  that  under  our  rules  it  is  impossible, 
or  nearly  impossible,  to  obtain  action  when  there  is  any 
considerable  opposition  to  a  bill  here. 

I  think,  Mr.  President,  that  when  the  necessity  and  the 
propriety  of  a  change  of  the  rules  so  as  to 
facilitate  the  transaction  of  business  is  thus  brought  to 
our  attention,  it  is  the  best  time  to  enter  upon  that  work. 
I  know  it  will  be  said  that  in  the  present  condition  of  affairs 
in  the  Senate  we  can  not  adopt  such  a  rule,  but  I  believe 

i  The  amendment,  presented  on  September  igth,  was  as  follows: 
Resolved,  That  Rule  IX  of  the  Senate  be  amended  by  adding  the 
following  section: 

SECTION  2.  Whenever  any  bill  is  pending  before  the  Senate  as 
unfinished  business,  the  presiding  officer  shall,  upon  the  written 
request  of  a  majority  of  the  Senators,  fix  a  day  and  hour,  and  notify 
the  Senate  thereof,  when  general  debate  shall  cease  thereon,  which 
time  shall  be  not  less  than  five  days  from  the  submission  of  such 
request;  and  he  shall  also  fix  a  subsequent  day  and  hour,  and  notify 
the  Senate  thereof,  when  the  vote  shall  be  taken  on  the  bill  or 
resolution,  and  any  amendment  thereto,  without  further  debate ; 
the  time  for  taking  the  vote  to  be  not  more  than  two  days  later 
than  the  time  when  general  debate  is  to  cease;  and  in  the  interval 
between  the  closing  of  general  debate  and  the  taking  of  the  vote, 
no  Senator  shall  speak  more  than  five  minutes,  nor  more  than  once, 
upon  the  same  proposition. 


404  Orville  H.  Platt 

that  we  can  adopt  it  by  a  vote  of  the  Senate  just  as  easily 
as  we  can  pass  the  repeal  bill,  and  just  as  quickly. 

He  believed  that  a  large  majority  of  the  Republicans 
in  the  Senate  would  favor  the  adoption  of  the  rule. 
The  consideration  of  the  resolution,  if  delayed  fac- 
tiously,  would  demonstrate  more  clearly  than  could 
be  demonstrated  in  the  consideration  of  the  repeal 
bill  that  the  opposition  was  engaged  in  obstructing 
and  filibustering: 

Mr.  President,  the  trouble  is  that  the  rules  of  the  Senate 
permit  unlimited  debate.  It  is  not  the  courtesy  of  the 
Senate,  as  is  generally  supposed,  that  is  invoked;  it  is  the 
right  under  the  rules  for  any  member  of  the  Senate  to 
speak  when  he  pleases,  as  long  as  he  pleases,  and  as  often 
as  he  pleases,  upon  any  pending  proposition.  .  .  . 

It  comes,  then,  to  this:  That  there  are  just  two  ways 
under  our  rules  by  which  a  vote  can  be  obtained.  One  is 
by  getting  unanimous  consent — the  consent  of  each  Senator 
to  take  the  vote  at  a  certain  time.  It  has  been  demon 
strated,  if  it  is  not  perfectly  patent  to  every  Senator  in 
the  chamber,  that  that  method  of  obtaining  a  vote  can 
not  be  made  available  upon  the  present  measure.  .  .  . 

Next  comes  what  is  sometimes  known  as  the  process 
of  "sitting  it  out,"  that  is  for  the  friends  of  a  bill  to  remain 
in  continuous  session  until  the  opponents  of  it  are  so  physi 
cally  exhausted  that  they  can  not  struggle  any  longer. 
That  may  or  may  not  result  in  a  vote  either  upon  this 
measure  or  upon  any  great  measure  upon  which  a  deter 
mined  contest  is  made.  .  .  . 

Such  a  practice  is  almost  inhuman.  It  smacks  of  the 
methods  of  obtaining  a  verdict  by  a  jury  where  the  jury 
is  locked  up  continuously  until  they  give  a  verdict.  The 
proposition  is  to  force  the  minority  to  surrender  upon  a 
test  of  physical  endurance.  The  result  usually  is  that  the 
majority  surrenders  upon  the  test  of  physical  endurance. 


Antiquated  Senate  Ways  405 

Mr.  President,  that  being  the  case,  why  may  we  not 
just  as  well  try  to  change  our  rules?  Is  not  that  the  best 
way  to  accomplish  the  purpose  of  those  senators,  myself 
included,  who  desire  a  vote  upon  this  subject? 

As  soon  as  the  repeal  bill  had  been  enacted,  the 
question  of  closure  drifted  along  without  serious  con 
sideration  for  several  years.  Mr.  Platt  and  others 
gave  it  some  thought,  but  that  he  was  not  disposed 
wantonly  to  disarrange  the  orderly  proceedings  of 
the  Senate,  is  shown  by  his  mild  reference  to  closure 
in  a  speech  which  he  delivered  in  response  to  the  toast 
"The  United  States  Senate"  at  the  Bridgeport  Centen 
nial  banquet  in  1900.  After  dwelling  briefly  on  the 
greatness  of  the  United  States,  and  the  multiplicity 
of  interests  involved  in  legislation,  he  said: 

The  Senate  of  such  a  nation  must,  as  a  matter  of  course, 
be  a  body  wherein  discussion  and  deliberation  are  not 
unduly  limited.  I  know  that  the  people  at  times  become 
impatient  because  the  Senate  acts  so  slowly,  and  that  it 
seems  as  if  a  minority  was  able  to  prevent  action  at  all. 
Yet  we  must  choose  between  ill-considered  and  well- 
considered  action.  In  the  Senate  of  a  great  country  such 
as  I  have  described,  great  and  momentous  questions 
constantly  arise.  To  be  rightly  decided  they  must  be 
intelligently  decided.  It  is  no  slight  tax  upon  a  Senator's 
industry  and  intellectual  capacity,  to  arrive  at  a  thorough 
understanding  of  these  great  questions.  If  the  people 
require  that  action  shall  be  based  on  a  comprehensive 
knowledge  of  the  subject  under  consideration,  it  is  evident 
that  each  question  should  at  least  be  fairly  discussed. 
The  right  of  unlimited  debate  may  be  abused,  and  yet,  with 
all  its  abuses,  it  is  a  safer  rule  to  allow  it  than  to  stifle  debate 
in  order  to  secure  immediate  action.  Minorities  have  rights 
as  well  as  majorities,  and  it  is  as  essential  to  the  welfare 
of  the  public  that  their  rights  should  be  fairly  recognized 


406  Orville  H.  Platt 

as  it  is  that  the  will  of  the  majority  should  govern.  I 
would  be,  and  I  am,  in  favor  of  a  reasonable  limitation  of 
debate  in  the  Senate,  but  I  am  not  in  favor  of  putting  into 
the  hands  of  the  majority  the  power  to  cut  off  fair  debate 
by  the  minority.  This  question  of  the  limitation  of  debate 
in  the  Senate  is  not  only  a  delicate  but  most  important 
one.  If  any  rule  can  be  devised  by  which,  when  a  measure 
has  been  fairly  and  sufficiently  debated,  it  can  be  brought 
to  a  vote,  a  great  reform  would  be  accomplished.  But  the 
difficulty  of  prescribing  a  rule  for  the  limitation  of  debate 
which  shall  apply  to  all  questions  alike,  is  very  great.  I 
sincerely  hope,  however,  that  some  plan  may  be  devised 
by  which,  without  injustice  to  the  minority,  the  majority 
may  be  able  to  secure  action  more  promptly  than  at  present. 
Bills  quite  frequently  come  from  the  House  of  Represen 
tatives  intended  to  put  into  law  certain  principles  which 
commend  themselves  to  the  judgment  of  the  people,  the 
specific  provisions  of  which  might  work  great  injury.  Wise 
and  intelligent  legislation  must  foresee  and  forecast  as 
well  the  effect  of  particular  provisions  as  the  adoption  of 
important  principles.  Let  me  illustrate  by  reference  to 
measures  which  are  likely  to  come  before  the  next  session 
of  the  Senate.  The  session  is  limited  to  three  months, 
expiring  by  limitation  of  law  on  the  fourth  of  March  next. 
Among  other  matters  which  will  be  pressed  for  considera 
tion  are  the  Hay-Pauncefote  treaty,  modifying  the  terms 
of  the  Clayton-Bulwer  treaty  with  England,  the  com 
mercial  treaties,  commonly  called  reciprocity  treaties, 
which  affect  most  of  the  great  industries  of  the  country; 
and,  in  general  legislation,  the  Nicaragua  Canal  bill,  the 
Shipping  bill ;  bills  for  the  re-organization  of  the  army,  for 
the  increase  of  the  navy,  for  the  reduction  of  the  internal- 
revenue  war  taxes;  possibly,  legislation  for  the  Philippines 
and  to  determine  our  relations  with  Cuba;  bills  and  a 
constitutional  amendment  relating  to  trusts,  relating  to 
the  hours  of  labor  and  convict-made  goods;  regulating  the 
granting  of  injunctions  in  controversies  between  employers 


Antiquated  Senate  Ways  407 

and  employed;  the  apportionment  of  the  next  House  of 
Representatives,  fifteen  general  appropriation  bills,  each 
of  which  raises  questions  of  vast  moment,  and  which  in 
their  aggregate  provide  for  the  expenditure  of  at  least 
five  hundred  millions  of  dollars.  Now,  if  the  Senate  is  to 
deal  intelligently  with  these  questions,  each  Senator  must 
have  a  thorough  and  intelligent  comprehension  of  them  in 
all  their  bearings,  and  this  can  come  only  from  intense 
study,  unremitting  application,  and  the  exercise  of  wise 
judgment.  Legislation  is  no  child's  play.  Mistakes  in 
volve  the  happiness  and  welfare  of  the  people. 

When  he  recited  the  catalogue  of  measures  pressing 
upon  the  coming  short  session  of  the  Senate  for  con 
sideration,  he  was  not  endowed  with  the  gift  of  pro 
phecy,  for  he  did  not  foresee  how  much  parliamentary 
skill  it  would  take  to  enact  the  most  important  legisla 
tion  of  all — the  measure  for  the  adjustment  of  the 
relations  between  the  United  States  and  the  republic 
of  Cuba,  a  measure  which  he  had  to  impose  as  a  rider 
upon  the  Army  Appropriation  bill  in  order  to  insure 
consideration  without  debate. 

The  privilege  of  unlimited  oratory  would  have  put 
it  in  the  power  of  a  single  Senator  in  the  closing  days 
of  the  session  to  prevent  action  on  the  Platt  Amend 
ment  if  proposed  as  an  independent  bill  and  compel 
the  President  to  call  an  extra  session  for  its  consid 
eration;  while  other  important  measures,  less  urgently 
demanded,  failed  for  a  like  reason  to  receive  any  consid 
eration  whatever.  This  trying  experience,  which  kept 
the  leaders  of  the  Senate  on  edge  for  weeks,  impelled 
them  to  seek  an  avenue  of  relief. 

On  March  5,  1901,  the  first  business  day  of  the 
special  session  of  the  Senate,  called  at  the  beginning 
of  the  second  McKinley  administration,  Mr.  Platt 


408  Orville  H.  Platt 

gave  notice  of  an  amendment  which  he  proposed  to 
offer  to  the  rules — the  same  in  terms  as  that  originally 
drawn  by  Mr.  Hoar  in  the  Fifty-first  Congress  and  sub 
mitted  for  the  Rules  Committee  by  Mr.  Aldrich.1 

It  was  not  acted  on  during  the  brief  opening  session. 
Before  Congress  met  in  regular  session  the  following 
December,  the  country  had  been  stirred  by  the  assas- 

i  Resolved,  That  for  the  remainder  of  this  session  the  rules  of 
the  Senate  be  amended  by  adding  thereto  the  following:  When  any 
bill,  resolution,  or  other  question  shall  have  been  under  considera 
tion  for  a  reasonable  time,  it  shall  be  in  order  for  any  Senator  to 
demand  that  debate  thereon  be  closed:  On  such  demand  no 
debate  shall  be  in  order,  and  pending  such  demand  no  other  motion 
except  one  motion  to  adjourn  shall  be  made.  If  such  demand  be 
seconded  by  a  majority  of  the  Senators  present,  the  question  shall 
forthwith  be  taken  thereon  without  debate.  If  the  Senate  shall 
decide  to  close  debate  on  any  bill,  resolution,  or  other  question, 
the  measure  shall  take  precedence  of  all  other  business  whatever, 
and  the  question  shall  be  put  upon  the  amendments,  if  any,  then 
pending,  and  upon  the  measure  in  its  successive  stages,  according 
to  the  rules  of  the  Senate,  but  without  further  debate  except 
that  every  Senator  who  may  desire  shall  be  permitted  to  speak 
upon  the  measure,  including  all  amendments,  not  more  than  once, 
and  not  exceeding  thirty  minutes. 

After  the  Senate  shall  have  decided  to  close  debate  as  herein 
provided,  no  motion  shall  be  in  order  but  a  motion  to  adjourn  or 
to  take  a  recess,  when  such  motions  shall  be  seconded  by  a  ma 
jority  of  the  Senate.  When  either  of  said  motions  shall  have  been 
lost  or  shall  have  failed  of  a  second,  it  shall  not  be  in  order  to  renew 
the  same  until  one  Senator  shall  have  spoken  upon  the  pending 
measure,  or  one  vote  upon  the  same  shall  have  intervened. 

Pending  proceedings  under  the  foregoing  rule,  no  proceeding 
in  respect  of  a  quorum  shall  be  in  order  until  it  shall  have  appeared 
on  a  division  or  on  the  taking  of  the  yeas  and  nays  that  a  quorum 
is  not  present  and  voting. 

Pending  proceedings  under  the  foregoing  rule,  all  questions  of 
order,  whether  upon  appeal  or  otherwise,  shall  be  decided  without 
debate,  and  no  obstructive  or  dilatory  motion  or  proceedings  of 
any  kind  shall  be  in  order. 

For  the  foregoing  stated  purposes  the  following  rules,  namely, 
vii.,  viii.,  ix.,  x.,  xii.,  xix.,  xxii.,  xxvii.,  xxviii.,  xxxv.,  and 
XL.,  are  modified. 


Antiquated  Senate  Ways  409 

sination  of  President  McKinley,  a  new  force  was  in 
control  at  the  White  House,  and  the  Senate  found  itself 
engaged  in  more  absorbing  questions  than  amendments 
to  the  rules.  Legislative  developments,  however,  were 
soon  to  stimulate  anew  Mr.  Platt's  interest  in  the 
subject. 

In  the  short  session  of  Congress  which  met  in  Decem 
ber,  1902,  obstruction  for  the  sake  of  obstruction  or 
revenge  became  a  recognized  feature  of  parliamentary 
procedure  in  the  Senate.  It  was  used  from  the  begin 
ning  to  prevent  the  Statehood  bill  from  coming  to  a 
vote.  Later  the  friends  of  the  Statehood  bill  combined 
with  others  in  retaliation  to  stifle  with  debate  the 
much  needed  Aldrich  Financial  bill  and  the  Philippine 
Tariff  bill,  while  Tillman  of  South  Carolina  held  Congress 
by  the  throat  and  forced  amendments  on  two  important 
appropriation  bills  in  the  last  hours  of  the  session. 
Morgan  of  Alabama  deliberately  talked  over  the  fourth 
of  March  the  treaty  with  Colombia  providing  for  the 
cession  of  rights  on  the  Isthmus,  and  compelled  a 
special  session  of  the  Senate  for  the  ratification  of  the 
Colombian  and  the  Cuban  reciprocity  treaties.  The 
country  was  aroused  by  all  this.  Mr.  Cannon  as  Chair 
man  of  the  Appropriations  Committee  f  ocussed  attention 
on  the  rules  of  the  Senate  by  denouncing  in  the  House 
the  practice  which  in  effect  permitted  legislation  only 
by  unanimous  consent.  Even  so  cautious  a  Senator 
as  Allison  of  Iowa  was  stung  into  offering  a  resolution 
directing  the  Rules  Committee  to  consider  whether  any 
changes  should  be  made  imposing  a  limit  on  debate. 
Mr.  Hoar  and  Mr.  Platt  proposed  amendments  pro 
viding  for  closure  under  certain  conditions.  Nothing 
was  done  beyond  referring  these  proposals  to  the 
Committee,  but  after  the  special  session  came  to  an 


410  Orville  H.  Platt 

end  Mr.  Platt  began  at  once  to  gather  material  with 
a  view  to  pressing  his  amendment  at  the  regular  session 
the  following  winter.  He  did  not  think  it  possible 
to  get  the  previous  question  in  its  naked  form  or  any 
such  drastic  rules  as  obtained  in  the  House,  which  to 
his  mind  resulted  in  the  passage  of  ill-considered 
measures : 

What  ought  to  be  done  in  the  Senate,  in  my  judgment, 
is  to  allow  reasonable  opportunity  for  debate,  and  then 
compel  a  vote,  but  what  is  reasonable  at  one  time  in  the 
session,  would  be  entirely  unreasonable  at  another  time. 
For  instance — two  or  three  weeks'  debate  in  the  early  part 
of  a  session,  upon  an  important  measure,  would  be  none 
too  much,  perhaps,  while  two  days'  debate  at  the  end  of 
a  session  would  enable  opponents  of  a  measure  to  kill 
it,  because  they  could  talk  the  time  out.  The  problem, 
and  it  is  not  of  easy  solution,  is  to  get  a  rule  which  will  be 
fair  at  different  periods  of  the  session.  I  think  my  propo 
sition,  that  two  fifths  of  the  Senators  may  fix  the  time  when 
a  vote  shall  be  taken,  and  limit  the  length  of  speeches  to 
be  made  in  the  interim,  comes  as  near  to  it  as  anything  I 
have  heard  suggested,  but  perhaps  that  is  not  perfect. 
At  any  rate,  I  shall  try  to  push  the  matter  at  the  commence 
ment  of  the  next  session.1 

He  had  in  mind  especially  Cuban  reciprocity,  but 
an  amendment  to  the  rules  proved  to  be  unnecessary 
for  the  immediate  purpose.  Public  sentiment  was 
slowly  at  work  during  the  summer.  President  Roose 
velt  called  Congress  in  special  session  in  November 
for  the  express  purpose  of  enacting  legislation  to 
carry  the  Cuban  treaty  into  effect.  The  bill  was  duly 
passed  and  limitation  of  debate,  no  longer  demanded 
for  a  particular  object  of  legislation,  was  lost  to  sight 
once  more. 

1  Letter  to  Jacob  L.  Greene,  March  28,  1903. 


CHAPTER  XXXI 

DIGNITY  OF  THE  SENATE 

"Legislation  by  Unanimous  Consent" — The  Senate  not  Decadent — 

Not   a   Rich   Man's   Club — Opposes    Seating    of    Quay — 

The  Tillman-McLaurin  Episode. 

ON  every  fit  occasion  the  Connecticut  Senator  used 
plain  speech  concerning  the  curious  growth 
known  as  the  " Rules  of  the  Senate."  The  habit  of 
transacting  business  by  unanimous  consent  was  espe 
cially  irritating  and  he  was  for  revising  the  rules  so  as 
to  do  away  with  it  altogether.  In  the  spring  of  1904 
there  was  a  bill  before  the  Senate  to  allow  Alaska  to 
be  represented  by  a  delegate  in  Congress.  Mr.  Platt 
was  opposed  to  it  for  the  same  reason  that  he  would 
have  opposed  a  delegate  from  the  Philippines — because 
he  feared  it  would  be  the  entering  wedge  for  statehood, 
and  he  was  radically  hostile  to  any  proposition  giv 
ing  statehood  to  non-contiguous  territory.  Those  in 
charge  of  the  bill  secured  unanimous  consent  one  day, 
fixing  the  time  for  its  consideration.  When  the  time 
arrived  he  was  not  ready  to  speak  because  he  did  not 
have  at  hand  certain  documents  to  which  he  wished  to 
refer,  but  those  who  had  secured  unanimous  consent 
insisted  on  taking  the  bill  up  at  once.  The  Senator's 
wrath  was  roused.  He  spoke  bluntly  and  frankly: 

It  seems  to  me  that  the  Senate  of  the  United  States 
ought  to  provide  by  its  rules  the  method  in  which  it  will 

411 


412  Orville  H.  Platt 

do  business,  and  that  the  practice  which  has  sprung  up 
here  of  trying  to  do  things  by  unanimous  consent  is  in  no 
way  a  substitute  for  rules  which  ought  to  be  provided  for 
the  orderly  transaction  of  the  business  of  the  Senate. 

There  never  is  a  unanimous  consent  given  here  which 
does  not  bind  some  Senator  in  some  way  in  which  the  Senator 
did  not  expect  to  be  bound  and  did  not  suppose  he  was 
bound.  I  have  seen  unanimous  consent  asked  for  and 
given  when  there  were  not  ten  Senators  in  the  Senate;  and 
because  asked  for  and  given  under  these  circumstances, 
there  was  supposed  to  be  some  sort  of  an  obligation  upon 
the  Senators  not  present,  and  who  would  not,  perhaps,  have 
given  their  assent  if  they  had  been  present,  that  that 
unanimous  consent  should  be  kept  to  the  letter,  and  the 
fraction  of  the  letter,  that  "the  pound  of  flesh"  should  be 
taken,  and  that  nothing  should  by  any  means  interfere 
with  the  carrying  out  of  such  a  unanimous-consent  agree 
ment.  I  do  not  intend  hereafter  to  give  my  assent  to 
fixing  a  time  for  action  upon  any  bill.  .  .  .  The  courtesy 
of  the  Senate  is  a  mysterious,  a  fearful,  and  a  wonderful 
thing.  It  is  to  be  exercised  on  occasions,  and  on  other 
occasions  it  is  not  to  be  exercised.  I  think  that  the  ex 
perience  of  this  day  most  certainly  points  to  the  necessity 
of  having  some  rule  in  the  Senate  by  which  the  Senate  can 
do  business  in  an  orderly  way  and  the  rights  of  no  Senator 
and  the  understandings  of  no  Senator  be  invaded  or  in 
fringed  upon.  I  do  not  think  that  a  previous  question 
pure  and  simple  ought  to  be  adopted  in  this  Senate ;  but 
I  do  think  there  ought  to  be  some  rule  whereby  debate  can 
be  limited  to  a  reasonable  time,  and  a  time  fixed  for  the 
taking  of  a  vote  otherwise  than  by  unanimous  consent, 
obtained  in  a  thin  Senate,when  perhaps  not  more  than  five 
or  six  Senators  are  here. 

Yet  the  slight  respect  in  which  he  held  some  of  its 
traditions  was  quite  in  keeping  with  his  scrupulous 
regard  for  the  Senate's  essential  dignities.  There  were 


Dignity  of  the  Senate  413 

no  questions  to  which  he  gave  more  conscientious 
thought  than  those  concerning  its  integrity,  and  no 
criticism  to  which  he  was  more  keenly  sensitive.  He 
was  proud  of  the  body  to  which  he  belonged.  He 
believed  that  the  framers  of  the  Constitution,  under 
the  lead  of  Roger  Sherman  and  Oliver  Ellsworth 
of  Connecticut,  builded  wisely  when  by  providing  for 
equal  representation  of  States,  large  and  small,  for 
long  terms  of  service,  and  for  election  by  the  Legislatures 
instead  of  by  popular  vote,  they  put  the  members  of 
one  branch  of  Congress  beyond  the  reach  of  temporary 
clamor.  He  was  convinced  that  in  the  equal  inde 
pendence  of  House  and  Senate  rested  the  hope  of  safe 
and  permanent  legislation.  He  was  impatient  with 
those  who  bewailed  the  decadence  of  the  Senate.  In 
his  view  the  average  of  ability  among  Senators  was 
much  higher  in  the  later  days  than  in  the  earlier 
time,  when  men  of  larger  fame  commanded  national 
applause.  With  the  multiplicity  of  interests  attending 
the  growth  of  the  country,  the  questions  to  be  considered 
in  Congress  had  become  more  complex  and  exacting, 
carried  more  far-reaching  consequences,  and  called 
for  more  accurate  and  comprehensive  knowledge  than 
ever  before.  "A  Senator  who  comes  now  to  this 
chamber"  he  said  in  eulogizing  Mr.  George  of  Missis 
sippi,  "meets  with  an  average  ability  with  which 
the  Senators  of  older  times  did  not  have  to  contend. 
No  man  can  be  pre-eminently  conspicuous  here  to 
day.  There  is  too  much  of  force,  of  learning,  of  strength, 
.of  ability  here  for  any  one  man  to  stand  head  and 
shoulders  above  his  associates."  He  used  to  say  that 
in  the  Senate  of  his  day  there  were  more  men  in  pro 
portion  to  the  membership  who  were  well  equipped 
to  deal  with  the  questions  of  the  present  than  there 


4i4  Orville  H.  Platt 

were  in  the  days  of  Webster  and  his  contemporaries 
equipped  to  deal  with  the  questions  of  the  past,  and 
he  had  known  Senators  who  would  not  lose  in  compari 
son  with  those  who  were  called  the  giants  of  former 
days.  At  a  time  when  the  outcry  against  the  Senate 
as  a  "millionaires'  club"  was  unusually  strident,  he 
rose  to  the  defence  of  his  associates.  "It  is  not  a 
body  of  rich  men"  he  said,  "whatever  the  popular 
belief  in  this  respect  may  be": 

In  a  membership  of  ninety  there  may  be  ten  who  would 
be  called  millionaires,  and  a  few,  perhaps  four  or  five,  who 
are  the  possessors  of  several  millions.  Of  the  remaining 
eighty  members,  about  one  half  may  be  considered  in 
comfortable  circumstances,  or  what  would  be  called  in  any 
community  fairly  well  off,  and  the  other  half  would  be 
ranked  as  poor  men  in  any  community.  I  think  in  no 
body  of  men  to  be  found  anywhere  in  the  world  is  a  man 
more  justly  and  critically  measured  for  what  he  really  is 
than  in  the  United  States  Senate,  and  in  no  body  of  men 
is  influence  more  justly  proportioned  to  ability  and  wise 
judgment  than  in  the  Senate.  A  Senator's  wealth  may 
count  in  social  life,  but  it  cuts  little  figure  in  the  Senate. 
To  be  influential  in  the  councils  of  the  Senate  one  must 
have  convinced  his  colleagues  that  he  has  intellect,  sound 
judgment,  and  absolute  integrity.  Whoever  possesses 
these  makes  the  influence  of  his  State  felt  in  the  national 
Senate.  He  may  possess  money,  but  without  the  qualities 
that  I  have  mentioned  he  is  little  more  than  a  cipher  there. 
The  Senator  poorest  in  worldly  goods  may  weigh  most  in 
the  deliberations  of  that  body,  and  the  man  richest  in 
worldly  possessions  may  weigh  the  least.1 

Such  exhibitions  of  bad  blood  as  occasionally  marred 
the  proceedings  of  the  Senate  filled  him  with  resent- 

1  Bridgeport  Centennial  banquet,  1900. 


Dignity  of  the  Senate  415 

ment.  When  in  February,  1902,  Tillman  and  McLaurin 
of  South  Carolina  came  to  blows  on  the  floor,  he  voted 
for  the  resolutions  of  censure  which  were  adopted, 
but  explained  that  he  did  so  reluctantly  because 
except  by  the  passage  of  the  resolutions  he  saw  no 
way  in  which  the  Senate  could  inflict  any  punishment 
upon  those  who  were  guilty  of  disorder.  He  had  a 
personal  liking  for  Tillman,  but  he  did  not  regard  the 
penalty  as  in  any  way  commensurate  with  the  offence. 
A  few  days  later  he  introduced  a  resolution  declaring 
it  to  be  in  the  power  of  the  Senate  to  punish  a  member 
for  disorderly  behavior  by  debarring  him  from  partici 
pating  in  its  proceedings,  and  still  later,  writing  to  a 
friend  he  voiced  his  indignation: 

We  have  not  got  through  with  the  Tillman  question  yet. 
After  we  had  apologized  to  him,  as  you  saw  in  reading 
the  proceedings,  I  introduced  a  resolution  to  the  effect 
that  the  Senate  had  power,  in  punishing  for  disorderly  be 
havior,  to  disbar  a  Senator  from  participation  in  the  pro 
ceedings  of  the  Senate.  That  raised  the  question  of  our 
right,  and  that  has  gone  to  the  Committee  on  Privileges 
and  Elections  and  they  will  make  a  report  upon  it,  I  think. 
Their  claim  that  we  cannot  do  it  because  it  deprives  the 
State  of  equal  representation  in  the  Senate  is  merest  bosh, 
and  yet  it  seems  to  trouble  a  good  many  people.  If 
Tillman  does  not  behave  himself  now  I  think  that  we  will 
expel  him,  though  we  have  not  got  two  thirds  vote  our 
selves,  and  some  of  our  Republicans  are  tender-footed.  He 
knows  better.  His  repeated  performances  are  deliberate, 
and  not  due  to  a  lack  of  proper  understanding  of  the  pro 
prieties  and  privileges  of  the  Senate.  What  he  does,  he 
does  with  malice  prepense  and  aforethought.  I  am  hot 
about  it. 1 

i  Letter  to  John  H.  Flagg,  March  5,  1902. 


4i6  Orville  H.  Platt 

Whenever  a  question  arose  as  to  the  right  of  a  Senator 
to  his  seat,  he  was  exacting  in  his  demand  that  the 
precedents  of  the  Senate  should  be  strictly  followed 
and  that  the  requirements  of  the  Constitution  should 
meet  with  rigid  compliance.  In  such  a  case  he  never 
permitted  personal  or  partisan  considerations  to  sway 
his  judgment.  During  the  'go's  there  was  an  epidemic 
of  deadlocks  in  State  Legislatures  resulting  in  a  failure 
to  elect  a  Senator  and  the  subsequent  appointment  by 
the  Governor  of  some  one  to  fill  the  vacancy.  In  every 
instance  Mr.  Platt  held  that  the  one  thus  appointed 
was  not  entitled  to  a  seat;  that  a  vacancy  could  not 
constitutionally  be  filled  by  appointment  unless  it 
had  first  happened  while  the  Legislature  was  not  in 
session.  Thus  in  the  case  of  Corbett  appointed  by 
the  Governor  of  Oregon  he  voted  against  seating,  al 
though  a  sound-money  Republican  vote  would  have 
proved  handy  in  the  Senate  at  the  time.  Against  his 
personal  and  party  inclinations  he  took  a  similar 
position  when  the  case  of  Matthew  Stanley  Quay  came 
before  the  Senate  in  the  springof  1900.  Quay  had 
been  for  twelve  years  a  Senator  of  influence,  personally 
well  liked  by  political  friends  and  opponents.  When 
the  time  for  his  third  election  came  around,  the  Penn 
sylvania  Legislature  was  in  deadlock,  and  after  its 
adjournment  the  Governor  appointed  him.  Some  of 
the  strongest  Republican  lawyers  in  the  Senate  favored 
giving  him  the  seat,  and  many  Democrats  would  gladly 
have  had  him  succeed.  Mr.  Platt  was  no  less  friendly 
than  others,  but  he  felt  compelled  to  take  the  lead  in 
the  debate  against  giving  Quay  the  seat.  He  cited 
a  formidable  array  of  precedents  and  authorities  to 
sustain  his  contention.  He  especially  resented  an 
intimation  that  the  majority  against  Corbett  had 


Dignity  of  the  Senate 

been     due    to    other    than    constitutional    considera 
tions  : 

I  do  not  believe  that  sixteen  Senators  in  this  body  voted 
to  reject  Mr.  Corbett  because  he  was  a  gold  standard  Re 
publican.  The  charge  is  one  which  reflects  greater  dis 
honor  upon  the  Senate  of  the  United  States  than  any  charge 
that  has  ever  been  made  against  it. 

The  question  he  declared  was  whether  anything  could 
ever  be  considered  settled  in  the  Senate.  Were  the 
uniform  precedents  and  unbroken  decisions  of  over 
one  hundred  years  to  be  observed,  or  were  those  pre 
cedents  to  be  disregarded  and  those  decisions  to  be 
overruled  upon  the  ground  of  personal  or  political 
friendship : 

There  are  no  enemies  of  Mr.  Quay  here.  In  the  considera 
tion  of  this  case  there  should  be  no  friends — that  is  to  say, 
no  one  on  account  of  his  friendship  should  vote  for  Mr. 
Quay — no  one  should  vote  for  him  on  that  ground  alone. 
Let  it  once  go  out  to  the  people  of  this  country  that  a 
Senator  is  to  be  seated  because  a  majority  of  the  Senate 
like  him  and  because  he  is  endeared  to  them  by  long 
association,  because  he  is  a  good  man  or  a  brave  man;  and 
that  one  who  is  not  liked  and  is  not  endeared  to  them  by 
association,  who  cannot  be  said  to  be  a  great  man  or  a 
brave  man,  is  not  to  be  seated,  the  Senate  from  that  hour 
will  sink  into  deserved  disrepute.  .  .  .  The  present 
claimant  of  this  seat  in  the  Senate,  who  thought  less  than 
two  years  ago  that  Mr.  Corbett  should  be  rejected,  now 
comes  with  a  case  admittedly  weaker  and  asks  a  decision 
in  his  favor.  If  the  Senate  should  accede  to  his  request, 
the  people  will  have  a  right  to  ask  and  will  not  be  slow  to 
ask  upon  what  ground  the  reversal  of  the  Senate's  de 
cision  rests.  Thereafter,  Mr.  President,  whoever  shall 
desire  to  aim  a  shaft  of  satire  against  the  inconstancy, 
27 


4i 8  Orville  H.  Platt 

the  favoritism,  the  partiality  of  the  Senate,  will  find  one 
ready  pointed  for  his  bow.1 

By  the  narrowest  possible  margin  the  Senate  refused 
to  seat  Quay.  Platt's  vote  would  have  turned  the 
scale. 

1  Congressional  Record,  ist  Session,  Fifty-sixth  Congress,  p.  4550. 


CHAPTER  XXXII 

LABOR  AND  CAPITAL 

An  Unbiassed  Judge — Opposed  to  Radical  Measures — A  Friend  of 
the  Workingman — Defeats  Anti-Injunction  and  Eight-Hour 
Bills — Supports  President  Roosevelt  in  Coal  Strike  and 
Northern  Securities  Case — Address  before  Workingmen's  Club 
at  Hartford — Opposition  to  Anti-Option  Bill — Speech  of 
January  17-19,  1893. 

BORN  and  brought  up  on  a  farm — the  most  natural 
and  most  wholesome  of  workshops — dependent 
upon  his  own  efforts  for  his  education  and  his  training 
in  the  law,  a  successful  lawyer  in  causes  affecting 
business  enterprise,  yet  never  gifted  with  the  genius 
for  pecuniary  gain,  Orville  Platt  came  into  public  life 
endowed  with  an  equipment  for  weighing  fairly  ques 
tions  concerning  capital  and  labor,  and  as  a  Senator 
he  gave  to  their  study  the  ripest  judgment  of  a  balanced 
mind. 

In  the  practice  of  his  profession  in  Meriden  before 
entering  the  Senate,  he  had  attained  an  annual  income 
of  probably  $25,000,  but  that  was  only  for  a  little 
time,  and  he  had  met  with  financial  reverses,  so  that 
throughout  his  life  he  felt  the  need  of  comforts  which 
money  might  have  bought.  He  cared  nothing  for 
money  in  itself,  yet  there  never  was  a  time  during  all 
his  years  in  Washington  when  he  was  free  from  irrita 
ting  financial  perplexities;  when  he  did  not  have  to 
''squirrel"  the  checks  he  received  from  magazines 

419 


420  Orville  H.  Platt 

for  an  occasional  article  -in  order  to  insure  a  few  days' 
summer  outing  in  the  Adirondacks;  when  he  did  not 
feel  compelled  to  decline  courtesies  which  he  knew 
he  could  not  afford  to  return.  Throughout  his  public 
life  he  was  entirely  dependent  on  his  salary,  and  if  he 
had  retired  from  the  Senate  at  any  time  after  he  entered 
it,  he  would  have  been  obliged  to  turn  his  hand  at  once 
to  the  task  of  earning  his  daily  bread.  When  he  died 
he  left  as  a  legacy  little  except  his  good  name.  Yet, 
lacking  for  himself  the  money  sense,  he  was  a  most 
conscientious  conservator  of  the  trust  of  others;  he 
respected  thrift  and  recognized  the  Ability  and.energy 
which  developed  industries  and  utilized  capital  to 
the  community's  general  good. 

From  the  beginning  of  his  professional  career,  Mr. 
Platt  was  in  close  touch  with  business  interests.  He 
believed  in  the  integrity  of  the  ordinary  man  of  affairs 
and  he  deprecated  irresponsible  attacks  upon  those 
who  had  accumulated  wealth.  At  the  same  time  he 
was  progressive.  He  sympathized  with  those  who 
strove  for  an  adjustment  of  the  relations  between 
labor  and  capital,  and  he  recognized  with  a  clearness 
of  vision,  which  increased  as  he  grew  older,  that  there 
was  no  more  dangerous  enemy  of  the  public  than  the 
unreasoning  man  of  wealth,  who  refused  to  tolerate 
even  mild  discussion  of  the  duty  of  concentrated 
capital  to  the  community,  and  who  cried  out  against 
all  agitation  of  sociological  questions  as  anarchistic 
and  revolutionary.  Thus  holding  an  even  scale,  had 
he  lived  a  little  longer,  he  would  have  been  a  powerful 
influence  for  good  in  stirring  times,  the  unrest  of  which 
is  still  upon  us. 

So  far  as  his  own  political  fortunes  were  concerned, 
he  apparently  was  indifferent  alike  to  organized  labor 


Labor  and  Capital  421 

and  to  organized  capital.  He  went  straight  his  own 
way,  uninfluenced  by  the  threats  or  the  blandishments 
of  either.  The  great  struggle  of  the  future  he  believed 
was  to  be  between  the  forces  of  socialism  and  the 
forces  of  established  order.  To  this  belief  he  often 
gave  utterance,  and,  looking  far  ahead,  he  so  shaped 
his  course  that  to  the  limit  of  his  power  and  opportunity 
he  might  contribute  to  the  wisest  issue  of  the  combat : 

Men  are  declaiming  and  agitating  to-day  not  for  the 
equal  rights  of  man,  but  for  the  equal  possessions  of  man ; 
that  destroys  equal  rights!  The  trouble  is  not  so  much 
that  there  are  millionaires  in  the  country,  as  it  is  that  there 
are  so  many  people  who  want  to  be  millionaires,  and  do 
not  care  how  they  get  to  be  so.1 

His  great  and  genuine  interest  in  the  American 
workingman  and  his  regard  for  the  nobility  and  dignity 
of  labor  were  manifest  in  his  public  utterances  and 
not  only  in  his  speech  but  in  his  conduct,  for  no  man 
ever  lived  who  came  nearer  to  meeting  his  fellow  crea 
tures  on  a  footing  of  equality.  When  the  bill  creating 
the  Department  of  Agriculture  with  a  Cabinet  officer 
at  its  head  was  before  the  Senate  in  1888,  he  objected 
to  it  on  the  ground  that  it  was  framed  to  benefit 
peculiarly  "the  agriculturists  who  are  at  the  top, 
not  the  agriculturists  who  are  at  the  bottom."  He 
pleaded  for  recognition  of  the  farm  laborer.  Mr. 
Morgan  of  Alabama  had  remarked  patronizingly: 

There  are  in  the  Senate  chamber,  I  dare  say,  Senators 
who  have  come  up  from  what  are  called  the  inferior  or 
humble  classes  of  society,  whose  fathers  and  mothers, 
with  themselves  toiled  in  the  field  for  the  bread  of  life 
until  perhaps  fifteen  or  twenty  years  of  age. 

1  Address  on  Lincoln,  Republican  Club,  Feb.  12,  1897. 


422  Orville  H.  Platt 

This  hit  the  Connecticut  farmer's  son  closely  and 
called  from  him  the  cordial  response : 

I  am  one  of  the  men  who  commenced  this  life  in  what 
the  Senator  from  Alabama  is  pleased  to  call  the  inferior 
or  humbler  class  of  society.  I  worked  with  my  father 
in  the  field  for  the  bread  of  life  until  I  was  more  than  fifteen 
years  of  age.  Some  of  the  time  I  worked  for  other  farmers 
for  wages,  and  I  wish  right  here  to  enter  a  protest  against 
that  life  being  called  inferior  or  humbler  in  any  sense  than 
life  in  any  other  occupation,  profession,  or  calling.  .  .  . 
If  I  were  to  go  back  to  my  native  town  and  attempt  to 
tell  its  citizens  that  when  I  left  the  farm  and  its  hard  labor 
I  went  up  into  a  higher  station  or  a  more  honorable  po 
sition  I  should  be  laughed  at,  and  justly  laughed  at.  There 
I  is  no  higher  or  more  honorable  or  more  dignified  station 
than  that  of  the  man  who  cultivates  the  farm.  I  do  not 
feel  that  my  position  as  Senator  is  more  worthy  of  respect 
and  honor  than  was  my  position  on  the  farm. 

In  the  course  of  this  speech  he  paid  tribute  to  the 
men  who  toil : 

Right  at  the  foundation  of  Republican  government  lies 
the  principle  that  the  man  who  works  shall  be  honored — 
that  his  position  shall  be  one  of  dignity,  that  no  man 
shall  have  a  right  to  despise  him  in  this  free  land ;  and  not 
only  that,  but  that  he  shall  have  such  wages  as  will  enable 
him  to  elevate  both  himself  and  his  family  and  those  de 
pendent  upon  him  in  the  scale  of  moral,  social,  and  financial 
well-being. 

The  great  underlying  force  of  America  is  the  workingman ; 
the  man  who  labors  and  toils,  the  man  who  receives  wages, 
and  just  as  he  is  elevated,  just  as  a  condition  of  things 
exists  which  lifts  him  up  and  makes  him  more  and  more 
a  man,  enables  him  to  ascend  in  the  scale  of  manhood,  a 
Republic  grows  strong;  and  just  in  proportion  as  any  policy 


u 


Labor  and  Capital  423 

exists  which  beats  him  down  and  degrades  him  in  the  scale 
of  manhood  the  Republic  grows  weak. 

With  us,  this  is  a  government  of  the  people.  It  is  more 
than  that,  it  is  emphatically  a  government  of  the  common 
people.  It  is  a  government  of  the  men  who  work.  More 
than  that,  it  is  a  government  of  the  men  who  work  for  wages. 

They  are  the  majority  of  its  voters.  They  set,  or  ought 
to  set  the  policy  of  the  government  in  finance,  in  education, 
in  civil  rights,  in  all  that  goes  to  make  a  nation  great 
and  honorable,  prosperous  and  beneficent.  The  common 
people  for  once  in  the  world  here  on  these  shores,  away  from 
the  tyrants  and  kings,  were  given  the  reins  of  government. 
Whatever  we  have  of  government  we  are  indebted  to  them 
for.  Whatever  we  are  to  have  in  the  continuance  of  free 
government  we  shall  be  indebted  to  them  for.  ... 

Let  no  one  delude  himself  with  the  idea  that  capital  is 
going  to  govern  this  country.  There  is  a  great  ground-swell 
of  humanity  in  the  world.  You  can  see  it  abroad  in  foreign 
lands,  in  monarchical  governments;  but  more  here  in  the 
light  of  our  free  institutions  this  g^eat  ground-swell  means 
that  humanity  is  taking  an  upward  step,  and  that  the  man 
who  works  is  to  rule,  and  he  is  to  rule  wisely. 

You  need  have  no  fear  of  him.  You  need  have  no  fear 
that  he  is  going  to  tear  down  and  destroy  free  institutions. 
He  is  going  to  conserve  and  preserve  them,  because  he 
knows  that  they  are  the  outcome  of  the  principle  which 
makes  him  what  he  is  and  what  he  wants  to  be. 

With  his  understanding  of  the  real  needs  of  honest 
labor  he  was  intolerant  of  those  who  fanned  the  fires 
ot  class  hate.  His  wrath  leaped  out  against  Grover 
Cleveland  when,  pending  his  second  election  and 
inauguration,  that  leader  seemed  bent  on  rousing  the 
feeling  of  the  laboring  classes  against  protected  in 
dustries.  "He  has  been  sowing  the  wind  ever  since 
election,"  he  wrote  to  John  Flagg.  "The  whirlwind 


424  Orville  H.  Platt 

harvest  is  getting  ready  for  the  reaping/'  Bryan  in 
1896  and  1900  was  unthinkable.  A  few  days  before 
the  election  in  1896  he  wrote: 

I  have  in  recent  speeches  tried  to  impress  on  my  au 
diences  that  every  one  of  the  objects  mentioned  in  the 
preamble  of  the  Constitution  is  directly  assailed  by 
this  communistic,  Bryanistic  outfit,  and  that  two  of  the 
three  great  branches  into  which  the  power  of  our  govern 
ment  is  divided,  the  executive  and  the  judicial,  are  directly 
and  intentionally  attacked.  I  think  that  in  the  minds  of 
the  people  all  their  issues  are  in  these  last  days  being  over 
shadowed  by  the  danger  of  rebellion  which  besets  us,  and 
that  thousands  of  men  who  are  somewhat  in  favor  of  free 
silver  will  vote  against  Bryan  because  they  dare  not  commit 
the  destinies  of  this  Government  to  Altgeld,  Tillman,  and 
Bryan,  who  represent  in  personal  characteristics  and  in 
their  developing  careers,  the  three  leading  spirits  of  the 
French  Revolution,  Robespierre,  Danton,  and  Marat.  The 
people  have  seen  it  this  last  week.  It  has  not  been  so 
before,  and  I  think  this  foreseen  danger  will  settle  the 
matter  against  Bryan. 

He  regarded  the  result  in  each  of  the  Bryan  cam 
paigns  as  an  escape  from  a  real  peril.  After  the  elec 
tion  in  1900,  he  wrote  to  A.  H.  Byington,  once  his 
secretary  and  then  Consul  at  Naples : 

That  man  Bryan  is  a  mystery.  He  seems  to  be  able  to 
hypnotize  his  followers  and  the  question  of  whether  he 
could  win  or  not  depended,  apparently,  on  whether  he 
could  excite  discontent  enough  among  people  who  ought  to 
be  reasonably  content,  to  give  him  a  majority.  He  did 
make  a  very  bold  and  bad  appeal.  It  was  the  poor  against 
the  rich,  or  the  less  fortunate  against  the  more  fortunate, 
and  I  think  no  one  was  entirely  sure  that  he  was  not  making 
inroads  on  us  by  that  appeal.  I  think  he  overdid  it.  We 
have  so  many  people  in  the  United  States  now  who  have 


Labor  and  Capital  425 

a  little  something  of  their  own,  or  hope  to  have  a  little 
something  in  the  future,  that  the  conservative  element  is 
much  larger  than  fellows  like  Bryan  think,  and  they  rather 
resent  the  idea  of  being  told  that  they  are  poor,  and  that 
it  is  to  their  interest  as  poor  people  to  pull  everything  down 
over  their  heads. 

Sympathizing  with  the  workingman,  yet  appreciat 
ing  the  .responsibilities  of  the^empkxye^  -of  labor,  he 
was  throughout  his  career  a  resolute  opponent  of 
legislation  calculated  to  create  a  breach  between  the 
two,  or  inconsistent  with  his  own  ideas  of  what  was 
seemly  under  the  Constitution  and  the  traditions  of 
the  law.  As  a  member  of  the  Judiciary  Committee 
he  was  an  obstacle  in  the  way  of  the  Anti-Injunction 
bill.  He  and  Senator  Spooner  came  to  a  trial  of  issues 
with  the  Chairman  of  the  Committee  in  1902  which 
resulted  in  Spooner' s  indignant  withdrawal  from  the 
Committee,  leaving  the  burden  of  opposition  upon 
Platt  alone.  For  many  years  he,  more  than  any  other, 
prevented  the  passage  of  the  ^^^Hour^bill.  His 
course  with  regard  to  the  Eight- Hour  bill  was  typical 
of  his  method  of  dealing  with  all  measures  which  he 
looked  upon  as  vicious.  Although  hard  pressed  by 
labor  organizations  in  his  own  State  upon  whose  good 
will  his  own  political  future  might  have  hung,  he  never 
faltered  in  the  fight,  and  he  was  brutally  frank  in  his 
response  to  labor  organizations  in  their  importunate 
demands.  "I  think  that  the  Federation  of  Labor  is, 
and  has  been,  impressed  with  the  idea  that  it  can  neither 
frighten  nor  cajole  me,"  he  wrote  in  1903.  "I  really 
think  its  members  respect  me  none  the  less  for  that. " 

The  Eight- Hour  bill  was  urged  with  unusual  insistence 
during  the  session  of  Congress  immediately  preceding 
the  Presidential  election  of  1904;  was  passed  by  the 


426  Orville  H.  Platt 

House,  and  was  reported  favorably  by  the  Senate  Com 
mittee.  Senator  Platt  not  only  opposed  the  measure 
in  the  Senate,  interposing  his  objections  at  every  step, 
while  other  Republican  leaders  were  favoring  its  pas 
sage,  but  he  helped  to  organize  and  stimulate  opposi 
tion  elsewhere. 

While  the  bill  ostensibly  applied  only  to  government 
operatives,  Mr.  Platt  recognized  that  in  actual  enforce 
ment  it  would  apply  to  manufacturers  generally. 
He  pointed  this  out  in  a  personal  letter  which  he  wrote 
on  October  21,  1904,  to  Secretary  Metcalf,  whose 
assistants  had  been  investigating  for  the  Department 
of  Commerce  and  Labor: 

We  have  a  great  many  manufacturing  establishments  in 
Connecticut  carrying  on  a  general  manufacturing  business 
of  course,  selling  their  goods  in  the  open  market ;  but  almost 
all  of  them  accept  some  work  from  the  Government — that 
is  to  say,  they  agree  with  the  Government,  or  with  a  con 
tractor  or  a  sub-contractor,  to  make  certain  articles  which 
the  Government  needs,  usually  different  in  some  respects 
from,  although  related  to,  their  general  line  of  goods.  This 
business,  while  it  is  but  a  small  and  apparently  unimportant 
part  of  the  whole,  does,  nevertheless,  often  enable  them 
to  keep  their  factories  going  and  their  laborers  employed, 
when  otherwise  they  would  be  obliged  to  dismiss  their 
employees,  or  run  on  shorter  time.  It  is  utterly  impossible, 
from  the  nature  of  the  case,  that  the  work  upon  such  goods 
as  are  for  the  use  of  the  Government,  should  be  limited 
to  eight  hours  unless  the  entire  business  of  the  establish 
ment  is  to  be  put  upon  the  same  plan.  I  need  not  elaborate 
to  show  that  this  is  so,  and  the  avowed  object  of  the  people 
who  are  pushing  the  Eight-Hour  bill  is  to  compel  every 
establishment  that  does  any  government  work  to  put  its 
entire  factory  upon  an  eight-hour  basis.  ...  I  do  not 
suppose  that  you  know  the  extent  to  which  this  controversy 


Labor  and  Capital  427 

has  been  upon  my  shoulders  for  the  past  six  years    in 
Congress. 

His  replies  to  labor  organizations  were  unmistakable. 
The  Typographical  Union  of  Waterbury  sent  him  a 
petition  urging  him  to  support  the  bill.  He  replied 
by  return  mail : 

I  have  not  thought  that  the  bill  is  in  the  interest  of  the 
workingman.  So  far  as  government  establishments  are 
concerned,  I  would  regard  it  favorably,  but  if  applied  to 
all  private  establishments  doing  some  government  work, 
either  directly  for  the  Government  or  indirectly  for  con 
tractors,  it  seems  to  me  it  would  only  produce  confusion 
in  such  places,  forcing  them  either  to  put  the  establishment 
as  a  whole  on  the  eight-hour  principle,  or  cease  their  work 
for  the  Government.  The  latter  I  think  is  what  most 
establishments  would  do.  This  would  simply  make  so 
much  less  work  for  the  laborer — perhaps  necessitating  at 
times,  the  shutting  down  of  the  shop,  when  otherwise  it 
might  be  continued  running  by  reason  of  the  government 
work.  I  think  the  bill  is  not  fully  understood  by  the 
workingman. 

To  the  Central  Labor  Union  of  Waterbury,  which 
adopted  resolutions  and  suggestions  as  to  his  action 
upon  the  Eight-Hour  and  Anti-Injunction  bills,  he 
replied : 

I  believe  that  neither  of  these  bills  ought  to  be  passed, 
and  that  neither  is  in  the  interest  of  the  workingman. 

To  a  Hartford  manufacturer  he  wrote : 

When  I  say  to  you  that  a  year  or  more  ago  the  State 
Federation  of  Labor,  holding  its  annual  meeting  in  Meriden, 
devoted  one  afternoon  to  denunciation  of  me,  saying  that 
I  was  the  one  man  who  had  prevented  this  legislation, 
and  calling  upon  all  members  of  the  labor  societies  in 


428  Orville  H.  Platt 

Connecticut  to  see  that  representatives  were  elected  who 
would  not  return  me  to  the  Senate  of  the  United  States, 
you  will  perhaps  understand  my  position  pretty  fully. 

Writing  to  M.   Hartley  of  New  York,  he  said: 

I  suppose  it  is  not  egotistic  to  say  that  the  bill  would 
have  gone  through  the  Senate  except  for  my  sole  opposition 
to  it,  an  opposition  by  which  I  have  incurred  the  hostility 
of  all  the  labor  organizations  in  the  United  States. 

He  did  not  confine  his  plain  speaking  to  the  represen 
tatives  of  labor-unions.  He  was  continually  telling 
needed  truths  to  those  who  were  seeking  legislative 
recognition  for  vested  interests.  Only  a  few  weeks 
before  his  death,  in  a  letter  to  a  New  York  capitalist 
he  said: 

I  do  not  suppose  the  Standard  Oil  people  have  any  idea 
of  the  sentiment  here  against  anything  that  is  thought 
to  be  of  benefit  to  them.  There  seems  to  be  a  perfect 
craze  now  regarding  the  operations  of  those  concerns 
called  "trusts,"  particularly  the  prominent  ones. 

When  Wall  Street  leaders  were  trying  to  defeat  the 
appropriation  for  carrying  into  effect  the  Income  Tax 
law  in  1895,  he  explained  to  them  carefully  that  it 
could  not  be  done,  and  when  one  of  them  questioned 
his  judgment  he  replied  testily: 

I  don't  understand  the  apparently  mysterious  belief 
existing  among  New  York  corporations  that  there  are  votes 
to  be  had  for  the  defeat  of  the  appropriation  for  income 
tax  purposes.  People  who  usually  give  me  credit  for  know 
ing  how  the  Senate  stands  on  a  given  question  say:  "  Our 
advices  are  positive  that  votes  enough  can  be  had  to  beat 
it."  "If  the  New  England  Senators  vote  against  it,  it 
is  surely  beaten."  When  I  ask  them  from  what  sources 
they  get  their  information,  they  look  very  wise  and  say, 


Labor  and  Capital  429 

"We  can't  tell  you  that,  but  our  information  is  reliable." 
Now  my  conclusion  is  this :  That  pervaded  with  the  idiotic 
idea  that  things  can  be  done  in  the  Senate  with  money, 
they  have  raised  a  fund  and  put  it  in  some  one's  hands  who 
is  not  only  bleeding  but  fooling  them.  I  know  that  C — 
said  that  he  and  another  man  could  have  $400,000  with 
which  to  beat  it,  but  he  had  concluded  that  it  could  n't 
be  done  and  was  going  to  tell  the  parties  so.  I  shall  find 
out  just  who  and  what  the  men  interested  are  relying  on. 
They  are  being  fooled,  as  men  always  are  who  get  such  no 
tions  about  legislation.  There  is  a  decided  majority  in 
the  Senate  for  that  appropriation  and  against  a  proposition 
to  repeal  the  income  tax.  Such  propositions  will  get  no 
Democratic  vote  but  Hill's — there  are  43  votes.  Every 
Populist  unless  it  is  Stewart — there  are  three  more,  46 ;  and 
there  are  five  Republican  votes  that  will  not  under  any 
circumstances  vote  against  the  appropriation.  There  are 
51  solid  votes.  Any  one  who  says  differently  does  n't  know 
what  he  is  talking  about.  •  I  hate  to  see  people  so  willing 
to  be  fooled  and  bled,  and  another  thing  that  annoys  me 
is  that  people  will  believe  that  the  Senate  follows  the  lead 
of  Quay  and  Hill.  How  men  who  can't  see  further  than 
this  ever  make  money,  I  can't  see.  It  must  be  luck — it 
is  not  judgment.  You  wanted  my  opinion  and  I  am  bound 
to  say  what  I  think. 

He  endorsed  with  little  qualification  the  two  most 
telling  blows  which  President  Roosevelt  struck  during 
his  first  administration  for  the  man  in  the  street. 
To  a  citizen  of  New  Haven  he  wrote,  while  the  nomi 
nation  of  the  President  was  still  pending,  in  the  fall 
of  1903: 

Why  are  business  men  not  earnest  in  their  support 
of  Mr.  Roosevelt?  What  has  he  done  to  forfeit  it?  I  hear 
two  reasons  mentioned  to  account  for  it.  One  is  his  efforts 
to  have  the  coal  strike  settled.  But  I  think  now  that  the 


430  Orville  H.  Platt 

matter  has  gone  by,  business  men  forget  what  was  apparent 
to  all  careful  and  thoughtful  observers  at  the  time,  namely: 
that  if  the  strike  had  continued  for  a  fortnight  longer, 
there  was  serious  danger  of  riot,  bloodshed,  and  indeed, 
possible  revolution.  Hungry  men  are  dangerous;  men  who 
are  unable  to  find  anything  with  which  to  warm  their 
houses  are  dangerous.  I  regard  that  as  the  most  critical 
period  in  our  history  since  the  war,  and  I  believe  that  if 
President  Roosevelt  had  not  exerted  himself  to  bring  that 
strike  to  a  conclusion,  there  would  have  developed  a  con 
dition  of  affairs  that  no  man  could  have  foreseen  the  end 
of.  I  think  it  is  not  only  to  his  great  credit,  but  to  the 
interests  of  the  whole  country  that  he  did  bring  about  a 
settlement  of  that  strike. 

The  second  thing  that  I  hear  of  which  troubles  business 
men,  is  that  he  directed  a  suit  to  be  brought  against  the  North 
ern  Securities  Company  for  a  violation  of  the  law  on  our 
statute  books — well,  he  is  sworn  to  execute  the  laws!  If 
the  attorney-general  believed,  as  I  am  told  he  advised  the 
President  he  did  believe,  that  this  Company  had  violated 
the  law, —  what  is  called  the  "Sherman  Anti-Trust  law," 
— what  would  you  have  had  the  President  do, — refuse  to 
take  action?  I  do  not  know  what  the  final  action  of  the 
courts  will  be,  but  I  do  know  that  the  Court  of  Appeals, 
composed  of  able  judges,  decided  that  there  was  a  violation 
of  that  law. 

I  want  to  say  one  thing  more — the  bringing  of  that  suit 
probably  checked  the  promotion  and  floating  of  over 
capitalized  combinations  in  the  United  States,  and  in  that 
respect  it  was  a  blessing.  The  matter  of  manufacturing 
corporations  with  hundreds  of  millions  of  dollars  capital, 
and  the  unloading  of  over-capitalized  stock  upon  innocent 
purchasers,  had  grown  to  an  extent  which  was  really  alarm 
ing,  and  which,  if  continued,  would  have  brought  down  the 
whole  financial  fabric  upon  the  heads  of  business  men. 

In  May,  1904,  he  was  invited  to  address  the  Working- 


Labor  and  Capital  431 

men's  Club  at  Hartford,  and  in  the  few  words  he  spoke 
there  he  outlined  his  general  attitude  toward  organized 
labor,  in  more  definite  terms  than  on  any  other  public 
occasion.  He  said: 

Some  things  appear  to  be  pretty  well  agreed  upon: 
First,  the  right  of  both  labor  and  capital  to  organize 
for  a  good  purpose;  second,  the  right  on  the  part  of  labor 
to  strike,  to  obtain  redress  of  real  grievances,  and  for  a 
possible  betterment  of  conditions;  third,  the  right  of  an 
employer  to  reduce  the  wages  of  his  employees,  or  to  dis 
charge  them  when  the  necessities  of  business  require  it; 
fourth,  that  a  man  has  a  right  to  work  without  belonging 
to  an  organization,  and  fifth,  that  belonging  to  a  labor 
organization  furnishes  no  just  ground  for  the  refusal  of 
employment  by  the  employer.  .  .  .  There  must  be  in 
every  dispute  a  fair  ground  of  adjustment.  Possibly  one 
of  the  parties  to  a  dispute  may  be  absolutely  right,  and 
then  it  has  to  be  settled,  if  settled  properly,  by  the  abso 
lute  surrender  of  the  other,  but  generally  speaking,  the 
fair  settlement  of  a  dispute  involves  concessions  by  each 
of  the  contending  parties.  I  think  this  is  true  in  90  per  cent, 
of  all  industrial  or  trade  disputes,  and  it  would  be  infinitely 
better  in  each  case  if  the  just  basis  of  settlement  could  be 
ascertained  before  the  dispute  reached  its  critical  and 
injurious  stage.  While  the  technical  right  to  strike  or  to 
lock  out  is  admitted,  yet  both  strikes  and  lockouts  result  in 
loss  and  harm  and  injury  to  both  parties  in  interest,  and 
not  only  to  the  parties  themselves,  but  to  the  public  at 
large.  .  .  .  What  the  world  wants  is  peace,  and  this  is 
true  in  the  industrial  world  as  in  the  world  at  large. 

The  great  unsettled  labor  problem  then,  is  how  are  the 
controversies  between  labor  and  capital  to  -  be  avoided ; 
how  are  they  to  be  settled  if  they  occur?  .  .  . 

I  never  hear  that  phrase,  so  almost  universally  used, 
"  the  conflict  between  capital  and  labor,  "  without  a  shudder. 
It  jars  upon  my  sense  of  truth.  It  is  like  its  twin  phrase, 


432  Orville  H.  Platt 

"the  conflict  between  science  and  religion" — misleading. 
There  is  no  real  conflict  or  antagonism  between  capital 
and  labor.  Capital  and  labor  are  interdependent;  their 
interests  are  mutual, — one  cannot  prosper  without  the 
other.  With  a  fair  understanding  of  their  mutual  relations 
each  must  prosper.  If  men  could  only  see  this,  the  world 
would  get  along ;  business  would  prosper,  workingmen 
would  be  happier  and  more  independent.  Above  all,  it 
seems  to  me  that  it  becomes  necessary  to  recognize  the 
changed  relations  which  exist  between  employer  and  em 
ployed.  When  I  was  a  boy  there  was  scarcely  a  manu 
facturing  establishment  in  the  State  of  Connecticut  which 
employed  as  many  as  fifty  workmen;  they  were  as  a  rule, 
small  establishments,  conducted  by  some  man  who  had 
been  an  employee  himself,  and  who,  by  thrift,  economy, 
and  fair  dealing,  had  acquired  a  little  capital  with  which 
i  he  established  a  business,  carried  on  under  his  personal 
supervision.  He  employed  his  workmen  personally;  he 
knew  them  intimately;  he  associated  with  them  in  their 
homes,  and  thus  the  employer  and  employed  each  recog 
nized  their  mutual  dependence  and  their  mutual  interests. 
But  that  time  is  all  gone  by.  .  .  .  Applied  science,  as  it 
is  sometimes  called,  has  absolutely  changed  all  the  con 
ditions  of  life  and  business.  This  is  the  age  of  organiza 
tion — an  organization  possible  only  as  the  result  of  the 
application  of  these  forces  of  nature  to  the  methods  of  doing 
business.  We  look  at  the  world  and  say  that  all  things  are 
changed.  The  old  things  have  passed  away,  and  all 
things  have  become  new,  but  there  are  some  things  which 
do  not  change.  The  organization  of  great  business  con 
cerns  with  millions  of  capital,  and  the  employment  of 
thousands  upon  thousands  of  organized  laborers  changed 
conditions  so  that  the  old  have  passed  away,  and  all  have 
become  new,  but  it  does  not  change  principles ;  it  does  not 
I  change  the  just  relations  of  man  to  man ;  it  does  not  change 
!  the  basis  of  just  dealing  between  man  and  man;  it  does 
.  not  change  their  mutual  relationship,  or  their  mutual 


Labor  and  Capital  433 

interest.  It  may  obscure  such  interests  and  relationships, 
but  they  exist,  because  the  only  true  basis  of  association 
of  men  is  the  recognition  of  the  immutable,  sacred  prin 
ciples  of  right  and  wrong.  The  good  is  eternal;  it  never 
changes,  and  every  contention  and  every  difference  ex 
isting  among  men  must  be  finally  settled  on  the  basis  of 
triumph  of  right. 

Mr.  Platt  stoutly  opposed  the  Anti-Option  bill  in 
1893, — a  bill  ''defining  options  arid  futures,  imposing 
special  taxes  on  dealers  therein,  and  requiring  such 
dealers  and  persons  engaged  in  selling  certain  products 
to  obtain  license. "  He  not  only  believed  the  bill  to  be 
unconstitutional,  but  declared  that  the  principle  con 
tended  for  by  its  advocates  was  the  most  dangerous  prin 
ciple  to  the  Republic  and  to  the  States  which  within 
his  experience  in  the  Senate  had  ever  been  announced. 
"I  believe,"  he  said,  in  antagonizing  the  bill,  "if  the 
principle  announced  here  is  adopted  and  sustained  by 
the  Supreme  Court  that  from  that  day  we  may  date 
the  decline  and  ruin  of  the  Republic."  The  bill  was 
defended  only  upon  two  constitutional  grounds,  one 
that  it  might  be  passed  under  the  taxing  power  of 
Congress,  the  other  that  it  might  be  passed  under  the 
power  to  regulate  commerce.  To  his  mind  there  was 
not  a  shadow  of  reason  to  support  either  of  these 
contentions.  While  by  no  means  a  strict  construction- 
is!  of  the  Constitution,  he  denied  that  the  right  of 
taxation  carried  with  it  the  right  to  destroy.  "The 
power  to  lay  taxes  is  limited  by  the  inherent  necessity 
of  the  case  to  the  principle  that  the  exaction  must  be  a 
tax;  and  not  a  sweeping  appropriation  of  the  whole." 
There  had  been.no  question  of  such  momentous  conse 
quence  before  Congress  since  the  War  of  the  Rebellion : 

The   deliberate  announcement   that   Congress  may   de- 
28 


434  Orville  H.  Platt 

stroy  individual  property  of  any  kind  in  any  State  and  may 
prohibit  individual  business  of  any  kind  in  any  State  is 
the  most  dangerous  doctrine  ever  proclaimed  in  this  cham 
ber  since  it  was  announced  that  States  had  a  right  to  secede 
from  the  Union  and  that  the  Government  had  no  power  to 
coerce  them. 

I  beg  Senators  who  think  that  in  an  incautious  moment 
they  have  in  some  way  become  committed  to  the  passage 
of  this  bill  to  stop  and  consider  what  they  will  be  committed 
to  if  the  bill  passes.  Can  a  Senator  commit  himself  to  the 
doctrine  that  Congress  may  destroy  all  individual  property 
at  will  in  every  State  of  the  Union,  may  prohibit  all  in 
dividual  business  at  will  in  every  State  of  the  Union? 
For  that  is  the  meat  and  the  essence  of  this  bill. 

As  for  the  contention  that  a  contract  of  sale  might 
be  regarded  as  interstate  commerce,  he  declared  that 
it  did  violence  not  only  to  the  use  of  language  but  to 
the  well-established  idea  of  every  lawyer,  and  that  it 
was  as  broad  and  far-reaching  in  its  consequences  for 
injury  as  the  claim  that  Congress  might  destroy  every 
thing  which  it  had  the  right  to  tax : 

It  does  not  rest  on  the  ground  whether  the  business 
proposed  to  be  prohibited  is  moral  or  immoral — there  is 
no  distinction  as  to  the  power  of  Congress  with  regard  to 
such  contracts — but  it  rests  upon  the  broad  ground  that 
before  the  articles  which  are  the  subjects  of  the  contract 
of  sale  have  in  any  sense  become  subjects  of  interstate 
commerce  the  contracts  themselves  may  be  an  injury 
to  interstate  commerce,  and  are  therefore  properly  sup 
pressed  and  made  criminal. 

If  that  be  true,  there  is  no  contract  of  sale  which  can  be 
imagined  in  this  broad  land  which  cannot  be  made  criminal. 
I  care  not  whether  it  is  a  gambling  contract  or  a  legitimate 
contract;  I  care  not  whether  it  is  made  on  the  board  of 
trade  or  in  the  store  of  the  wholesale  or  retail  merchant  or 


Labor  and  Capital  435 

in  the  home  of  the  citizen;  I  care  not  whether  it  is  a  con 
tract  for  immediate  delivery  or  for  future  delivery,  if  the 
power  exists  as  claimed,  every  business  contract  can  be 
made  criminal,  if  only  Congress  can  be  impelled  by  outside 
clamor  and  by  demagogism  to  declare  it  illegal,  and  the 
further  contention  is  correct,  that  Congress  having  de 
clared  the  fact,  it  cannot  be  questioned.  It  is  a  dangerous 
doctrine.  It  will  be  like  that  class  cf  "instructions  which 
return  to  plague  the  inventor"  if  it  be  adopted.  .  .  . 

I  am  surprised  and  appalled  that  it  should  be  thought 
possible  that  Senators  can  deliberately  vote  to  give  the 
Congress  of  the  United  States  power,  under  either  of  these 
clauses,  to  cut  up  root  and  branch  all  business  in  the  States, 
to  destroy  at  its  own  sweet  will  all  individual  property 
in  the  United  States.  The  advocates  of  the  single  tax 
theory  will  find  here  an  easy  way  to  the  accomplish 
ment  of  their  ultimate  purpose,  that  all  the  lands  shall  be 
gathered,  as  it  were,  into  the  treasury  of  the  general  gov 
ernment  and  be  owned  by  it;  the  advocates  of  taking  con 
trol  of  all  corporate  agencies  in  the  United  States  will  find 
here  an  easy  and  smooth  path  by  which  their  ends  may  be 
accomplished  when  they  make  Senators  fear  that  to  vote 
against  such  a  measure  is  to  lose  their  party  support. 

Before  speaking  against  the  bill  he  had  received  a 
dispatch  from  the  convention  of  Connecticut  farmers 
requesting  the  Connecticut  iSenators  to  support  the 
measure  by  their  vote  and  influence,  referring  to 
which  he  said: 

I  respect  the  farmers  of  the  State  of  Connecticut.  I 
respect  them  too  much  to  believe  that  they  expect  me  to 
vote  for  a  measure  which  I  believe  to  be  in  violation  of  the 
Constitution  of  the  United  States,  in  subversion  of  the 
rights  of  the  State,  and  for  a  principle  which,  if  carried  out 
to  its  logical  conclusion,  will  leave  us  without  self-governing 
States.  .  .  .  When  any  considerable  body  of  men  in 


436  Orville  H.  Platt 

my  State  desire  me  to  vote  for  a  measure,  it  is  my  duty  to 
carefully  consider  that  measure  so  that  I  may  not  come 
hastily  to  a  conclusion  in  opposition  to  it;  but  I  trust  that 
there  has  been  given  me  courage,  if  I  believe  a  bill  to  be 
unconstitutional  or  an  unlawful  or  illegitimate  exercise  of 
the  constitutional  powers  of  Congress,  to  vote  against  it 
even  if  every  member  of  every  class  in  my  State  requested 
me  to  vote  for  it ;  and  I  have  confidence  enough  in  my  con 
stituents  to  believe  that  they  would  respect  my  judgment 
and  honor  my  conclusion. 

The  practical  results  so  far  as  the  farmers  were 
concerned  he  did  not  discuss  at  great  length,  because 
in  his  mind  the  question  of  whether  the  Constitution 
should  be  observed  far  transcended  the  question  of 
whether  the  farmers  of  the  United  States  were  to  get 
two  or  three  cents  a  bushel  more  for  their  wheat  or  a 
cent  or  two  a  pound  more  for  their  cotton.  But  he 
was  Chairman  of  the  Sub-Committee  of  the  Judiciary 
Committee  which  took  testimony  in  reference  to  the 
bill,  and  nothing  in  the  testimony  had  convinced  him 
that  the  farmers  would  derive  the  slightest  benefit  from 
its  passage.  He  did  not  believe  that  the  average  price 
for  a  year  of  wheat  or  cotton  was  a  cent  lower  or  a 
cent  higher  by  reason  of  dealings  in  options  and  futures : 

But  who  is  to  fix  the  price  of  the  productions  of  the  farm 
ers  if  this  bill  passes?  Have  they  thought  of  that?  Do 
they  not  understand,  with  the  present  power  of  concen 
tration  of  capital,  with  the  present  haste  to  make  riches, 
that  the  price  will  still  be  fixed  by  some  one  else,  and  not 
by  themselves?  Has  it  ever  entered  their  minds  that  the 
price  hereafter  for  those  agricultural  productions  will  be 
fixed  in  the  matter  of  grain  by  the  millers  and  the  elevator 
men  and  the  commission  merchants,  and  in  the  case  of 
cotton  by  the  commission  merchants?  Do  the  farmers 


Labor  and  Capital  437 

expect  that  the  price  will  be  fixed  by  the  millers  and  eleva 
tor  men  and  the  railroad  and  commission  men  any  more 
to  their  advantage  than  they  now  suppose  it  to  be  fixed 
by  the  men  who  deal  in  future  contracts  ? 

Mr.  President,  it  is  not  five  years'  time  since  the  farmers 
of  the  West  were  almost  on  the  point  of  open  resistance,  be 
cause  their  rights  were  not  respected  and  because  of  the 
wrongs  which  they  supposed  were  being  inflicted  upon  them 
by  the  elevator  men  of  the  West.  Pass  this  bill,  and  it 
will  not  be  five  years  more  before  they  will  believe  that  the 
millers  and  the  elevator  men  of  the  West  are  unconscionably 
making  and  fixing  the  price  of  their  grain.  How  can  it 
be  otherwise  with  regard  to  all  crops  raised  by  the  farmers 
of  the  United  States,  three  fourths  of  which  must  be  sold 
within  ninety  days  from  the  time  they  are  harvested? 
Who  is  to  buy  except  the  men  who  by  the  consolidation 
and  aggregation  of  capital  have  the  means  of  buying  thatj 
immense  quantity  which  is  not  required  for  immediate 
consumption?  Do  the  farmers  suppose  that  the  millers 
and  the  elevator  men  will  consult  them  as  to  what  the  price 
shall  be?  Do  they  suppose,  when  the  millers  and  elevator 
men  have  stored  their  elevators  and  their  warehouses  full 
and  have  all  they  want,  they  will  not  say  "we  do  not  want 
to  buy"?  Then,  with  this  immense  quantity  coming  upon 
the  market,  how  is  the  price  to  be  fixed  except  to  the  dis 
advantage  of  the  men  who  produce  the  crops? 

Mr.  President,  I  commend  to  the  advocates  of  this  bill 
the  scriptural  phrase:  "They  who  take  the  sword  shall 
perish  by  the  sword."  We  have  come  to  the  parting  of 
the  ways.  Shall  we  stand  by  what  has  been  understood 
to  be  the  uncontested  principles  of  the  Constitution,  or 
shall  we  depart  from  them  at  the  demand  of  the  anarchistic, 
the  socialistic,  and  the  populistic  agitators  of  the  country. 

I  firmly  believe  that  the  passage  of  this  bill  will  open 
up  a  highway  along  which  every  constitutional  heresy  can 
make  progress,  along  which  the  cohorts  of  social  disorder 
and  fanaticism  may  march  to  the  ruin  of  the  Republic. 


CHAPTER  XXXIII 

REGULATION  OF  CORPORATIONS 

Favors  Reasonable  Control  —  Opposes  Sherman  Anti-Trust  Bill  — 

In  Sympathy  with  Roosevelt's  Plans  —  Against  Littlefield 

Bill  in  1902  —  Opposes  Income  and  Corporation  Tax. 


the  indiscriminate  assaults  upon  trusts  and 
corporations  which  cut  so  large  a  figure  in  the 
politics  of  his  time  Mr.  Platt  was  utterly  opposed. 
That  there  were  evils  to  be  remedied  he  recognized, 
and  he  was  not  reluctant  to  acknowledge  the  necessity 
for  judicious  federal  regulation,  but  the  mad  cry 
against  organized  capital,  as  if  in  itself  it  were  an 
affront  to  public  morals,  rang  harshly  on  his  ear.  To 
his  mind  no  issue  of  morality  was  necessarily  involved. 
The  problem  was  strictly  one  of  the  practical  advisa 
bility  of  insuring  business  competition  by  statute,  and 
regulating  by  law  the  concentration  of  wealth,  and 
it  resolved  itself  into  two  simple  questions:  First, 
shall  we  by  law,  if  we  can,  provide  that  competition 
shall  be  unlimited  and  unrestrained;  second,  shall 
we,  if  we  can,  limit  the  extent  to  which  combination 
may  proceed  short  of  absolute  monopoly?  Within 
those  bounds  he  thus  formulated  his  own  position: 

I  hold  that  a  reasonable  limitation  of  competition  is  wise, 
that  a  reasonable  limitation  of  prices  is  wise,  and  that  a 
reasonable  control  of  production  is  wise. 

438 


Regulation  of  Corporations  439 

'Any  interference  by  legislation  with  such  orderly 
development  of  natural  laws  could  result  only  in  evil, 
yet  the  community  owed  to  itself  that  in  the  process 
of  natural  expansion,  business  and  capital  should 
always  have  before  their  eyes  the  possibility  of  whole 
some  and  effective  restraint.  The  word  "trust,"  he 
pointed  out  in  the  earlier  days  of  the  discussion,  was 
used  indiscriminately.  If  the  original  meaning  were 
to  be  retained  there  were  really  no  trusts  in  the  United 
States.  Aggregate  capital  was  not  necessarily  a  trust, 
even  though  it  were  large.  Nothing  was  a  trust  except 
where  different  concerns  which  had  been  in  competition 
pooled  their  issues  and  transferred  all  their  property 
to  a  new  company  organized  for  the  purpose  of  taking 
over  their  property  so  as  practically  to  create  a  mono 
poly  of  the  business  in  which  they  were  engaged: 

If  that  condition  of  things  ever  comes  about — the  es 
tablishment  of  a  monopoly  in  business,  by  whatever  way 
it  shall  be  brought  about — that  thing  is  harmful  and  pre 
judicial  to  the  community.  But  consolidation  without 
monopoly  is  an  evolution  of  present  conditions,  and  you 
can  no  more  stop  it  than  you  can  stop  the  tides  or  the  sun 
light.  It  is  a  law,  just  as  much  as  any  other  natural  law. 

He  recalled  the  time,  during  his  youth  and  early 
manhood,  when  no  man's  social,  moral,  or  business 
circle  was  more  than  a  few  miles  in  extent,  and  all 
competition  was  of  necessity  within  that  limited  circle. 
But  there  came  into  the  world  certain  new  agents, 
steam  and  electricity,  the  result  of  which  was  to  widen 
and  broaden  the  field  of  activity,  until  it  had  come  about 
that  instead  of  a  little  community  circumscribed  by  a 
horizon  fifty  or  one  hundred  miles  away,  it  was  co 
extensive  with  the  globe.  It  was  as  utterly  impossible 


440  Orville  H.  Platt 

to  transact  business  in  these  days  on  the  old  principles, 
as  it  was  to  go  back  to  the  stage-coach.  Whether  the 
change  from  old  conditions  to  new  was  merely  a  pass 
ing  phase  or  not,  we  could  not  help  it.  We  had 
talked  about  railroad  consolidation,  but  the  country 
would  not  go  back  to  the  little  railroads  of  earlier 
days,  each  with  its  line  of  one  hundred  miles  or  so, 
each  with  its  own  rates  and  its  own  idea  of  business. 
As  railroad  consolidation  had  come  to  stay,  and  must 
,  be  subject  to  regulations  to  prevent  unnecessary  dam 
age  to  the  community,  so  the  consolidation  of  capital 
had  come  to  stay  and  must  be  regulated.  He  was 
mindful  of  the  fact  that  we  were  not  the  first  to  consoli 
date  capital  and  great  concerns  in  a  business  way. 
England,  France,  and  Germany  were  quick  to  catch 
the  idea  that  the  field  of  business  operations  had  been 
extending : 

Whereas,  a  few  years  ago,  if  a  man  in  Germany  wanted  to 
buy  anything  in  London,  he  had  to  sit  down  and  write  a 
letter  to  go  by  slow  post,  a  week  to  go  there,  another  to 
get  an  answer,  and  three  or  four  weeks  before  the  goods 
could  be  delivered,  he  can  now  sit  down  in  an  office  and 
telegraph  and  do  it  all  in  a  day.  Business  has  to  accommo 
date  itself  to  these  conditions.  If  a  man  in  Chicago  wants 
to  buy  a  cargo  in  New  York,  or  sell  a  cargo  there,  he  does 
not  send  a  letter  to  go  by  post — he  goes  to  his  telephone: 
" How  much  will  you  give  me  for  a  cargo  of  wheat? "  "  So 
much."  "I  will  sell  it  to  you  to-morrow  and  transfer  the 
money  for  it."  It  involves  the  necessity  for  greater 
capital,  and  the  people  in  England,  Germany,  and  France 
were  the  first  to  find  it  out.  If  we  did  not  do  it  we  would 
have  to  withdraw  from  the  race  and  lag  behind  in  the  busi 
ness  procession  of  the  world.  The  thing  has  come  to  stay; 
it  is  a  necessity,  and  all  this  has  worked  for  the  benefit  of 


Regulation  of  Corporations  441 

the  community,  so  that  when  we  get  through  this  transition 
period,  every  one  will  be  better  off  for  it. 

At  the  same  time  steps  must  be  taken  to  regulate 
and  control: 

The  remedy  is  not  to  kill  great  establishments  carrying 
on  this  business,  whether  they  be  corporations,  partner 
ships,  or  individuals,  or  to  kill  the  business.  If  there  are 
any  evils,  they  are  such  as  grow  out  of  the  transaction  of 
business  anywhere,  whether  by  individuals  or  partnerships 
or  corporations.  A  corporation,  no  matter  how  much  its 
capital,  which  simply  tries  to  take  advantage  of  all  econ 
omies  to  cheapen  the  process  of  production  and  distribution, 
tries  to  get  only  a  fair  profit  and  reasonable,  is  a  blessing 
to  the  community,  I  do  not  care  if  its  capital  is  one  hundred 
millions  or  one  hundred  billions.  The  difficulty  is  that  we 
cannot  always  trust  property  to  do  those  things  in  a  way 
which  the  judgment  of  mankind  says  is  right  and  fair. 
The  problem  is  how  to  control  them;  how  to  keep  people 
honest ;  how  to  keep  corporations  right  and  fair  and  honest 
in  their  dealings,  and  that  subject  is  a  great  one.  It  does 
not  do  to  go  about  denouncing  trusts — some  one  must  pre 
sent  some  plan,  either  national  or  state,  which,  without 
destroying  or  crippling  business,  and  thereby  endangering 
the  country,  will  keep  them  along  the  path  of  honesty. 
It  is  useless  to  say  that  this  is  a  political  issue,  or  can  be 
made  a  political  issue  in  a  campaign,  until  some  one  thinks 
he  has  discovered  that  which  is  very  hard  to  discover, 
a  proper  method  of  regulation  without  injury.  When  some 
man  discovers  that,  and  proposes  to  do  this  or  that  thing, 
then  the  people  will  look  at  that,  and  there  may  be  an 
honest  political  issue  raised,  whether  the  proposed  plan 
will  accomplish  the  purpose  to  regulate  without  a  greater 
damage — a  damage  which  more  than  compensates  for  the 
benefit  proposed.  The  question  of  how  trusts  are  to  be 
dealt  with  is  one  to  be  thought  out,  not  by  demagogues, 
but  by  honest  men. 


442  Orville  H.  Platt 

Such  were  his  views  on  the  subject  of  trusts  as  they 
were  set  down  in  1899,  when  the  issue  was  especially 
alive,  and  such  they  remained  in  substance  to  the  end. 

When  John  Sherman  brought  in  his  Anti-Trust  bill 
from  the  Senate  Finance  Committee,  in  the  winter  of 
1890,  Mr.  Platt  urged  that  the  measure  be  referred 
to  the  Judiciary  Committee  for  further  consideration 
and  amendment.  He  felt  that  in  its  existing  form  it 
was  hasty  and  ill-considered  legislation,  and  that, 
if  a  measure  of  such  far-reaching  importance  was  to  be 
enacted,  it  should  be  the  ripest  product  of  the  mature 
judgment  of  the  best  lawyers  of  the  Senate.  He 
believed  the  bill  as  it  stood  to  be  contrary  to  public 
policy,  and  of  questionable  constitutionality.  When 
he  was  asked  by  Senator  Washburn  of  Minnesota, 
"if  any  special  harm  would  come  to  the  country  or 
anybody  else  by  the  passage  of  the  bill  if  it  should 
afterwards  be  held  to  be  unconstitutional  by  the 
Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States,  "  he  replied : 

Whenever  Congress  passes  a  bill  which  the  concurrent 
sentiment  of  Congress  believes  to  be  unconstitutional,  it 
does  a  greater  damage  to  the  people  of  this  country  than 
is  well  to  be  calculated. 

Pitted  against  the  most  influential  leaders  of  his 
own  party  in  the  Senate — against  what  at  the  moment 
seemed  to  be  a  majority  of  the  Senate — he  unfalteringly 
made  plain  his  opposition  to  the  bill  in  the  form  then 
held.  When  the  vote  on  the  question  of  reference 
finally  came,  he  was  one  of  eight  Republicans  who 
joined  the  Democratic  minority,  carrying  the  motion 
to  refer  by  the  narrow  margin  of  31  to  28.  When 
the  bill  came  back  from  the  Judiciary  Committee  in 
its  modified  form,  he  voted  for  it,  as  did  every  other 


Regulation  of  Corporations  443 

Senator  recorded,  with  a  single  exception,  although 
it  did  not,  even  in  its  revised  form,  command  his  appro 
bation.  Speaking  of  the  bill,  while  still  in  its  imperfect 
stage,  he  attacked,  not  only  the  merits  of  the  measure, 
but  also  the  methods  adopted  by  Mr.  Sherman  as  Chair 
man  of  the  Finance  Committee,  to  force  it  through  the 
Senate.  Sherman  never  forgave  him  for  the  criticisms 
he  offered  on  the  floor;  yet  time  has  fully  vindicated 
his  course. 

While  the  bill  was  still  in  its  ill-considered  form  he 
argued  against  it  with  a  directness,  force,  and  courage 
not  excelled  during  all  the  years  of  controversy  and 
agitation  which  followed  in  the  wake  of  its  enactment. 
In  the  course  of  the  debate  he  said : 

I  do  not  like  to  vote  against  this  bill.  I  believe  that 
there  are  combinations  in  this  country  which  are  criminal, 
but  I  believe  that  every  man  in  business — I  do  not  care 
whether  he  is  a  farmer,  a  laborer,  a  miner,  a  sailor,  a  manu 
facturer,  a  merchant — has  a  right,  a  legal  and  a  moral 
right,  to  obtain  a  fair  profit  upon  his  business  and  his 
work;  and  if  he  is  driven  by  fierce  competition  to  a  spot 
where  his  business  is  unremunerative,  I  believe  it  is  his 
right  to  combine  for  the  purpose  of  raising  prices  until 
they  shall  be  fair  and  remunerative.  This  bill  makes  no 
distinction.  It  says  that  every  combination  which  has 
the  effect  in  any  way  to  advance  prices  is  illegal  and  void. 
The  Senator  from  Ohio  in  the  first  speech  which  he  made 
here  admitted  that  there  were  combinations  in  which 
there  was  no  wrong,  and  yet  he  levelled  his  bill  at  them 
equally  with  the  combinations  which  are  doing  wrong.  .  .  . 
Whenever  the  price  of  anything  is  below  what  it  costs  to 
produce  it,  it  ought  to  be  raised,  and  any  combination  for 
the  purpose  of  raising  it  to  a  point  where  the  price  is  fair  i ; 
and  reasonable  ought  not  to  be  condemned ;  it  ought  to  \ 
be  encouraged.  It  will  not  do,  because  a  few  concerns 


444  Orville  H.  Platt 

in  this  country  are  attempting  to  put  prices  where  they  are 
unreasonable,  to  enrich  themselves  beyond  a  fair  compensa 
tion  or  equivalent  for  their  capital,  their  skill,  and  their  en 
terprise — it  will  not  do  to  cast  out  your  drag-net  and  bring 
within  the  condemnation  of  your  law  all  the  legitimate 
business  enterprises  of  the  country  that  are  struggling 
along  and  trying  to  obtain  only  fair  and  reasonable  prices 
for  their  goods,  and  who  are  giving  life  to  labor,  and  peace 
and  plenty  to  the  whole  land.  .  .  . 

The  theory  of  this  bill  is  that  prices  must  never  be  ad 
vanced  by  any  two  or  more  persons,  no  matter  how  ruin 
ously  low  they  may  be.  That  theory  I  denounce  as  utterly 
untenable,  as  immoral.  .  .  . 

I  am  ready  to  go  to  the  people  of  the  State  of  Connecticut ; 
I  have  faith  and  confidence  in  them ;  and  when  I  tell  them 
that  here  is  a  bill  which,  under  the  guise  of  dealing  with 
trusts,  would  strike  a  cruel  blow  at  their  entire  industries, 
I  know  that  they  will  see  it  and  understand  it ;  and  if  there 
be  a  people  anywhere  in  this  country  who  cannot  under 
stand  it,  it  is  better  for  a  Senator  to  answer  to  his  judgment 
and  his  conscience  than  it  is  to  answer  to  their  misappre 
hensions. 

I  am  sorry,  Mr.  President,  that  we  have  not  had  a  bill 
which  had  been  carefully  prepared,  which  had  been  thought 
fully  prepared,  which  had  been  honestly  prepared  to  meet 
the  object  which  we  all  desire  to  meet.  The  conduct  of 
this  Senate  for  the  past  three  days — and  I  make  no  per 
sonal  allusions — has  not  been  in  the  line  of  the  honest 
preparation  of  a  bill  to  prohibit  and  punish  trusts.  It  has 
been  in  the  line  of  getting  some  bill  with  that  title  that  we 
might  go  to  the  country  with.  The  questions  of  whether 
a  bill  would  be  operative,  of  how  it  would  operate,  or 
whether  it  was  within  the  power  of  Congress  to  enact  it, 
have  been  whistled  down  the  wind  in  this  Senate  as  idle 
talk,  and  the  whole  effort  has  been  to  get  some  bill  headed : 
"A  Bill  to  Punish  Trusts"  with  which  to  go  to  the  country. 
.  .  .  We  should  legislate  better  than  that.  Every  effort 


Regulation  of  Corporations  445 

to  refer  this  bill  to  any  committee  that  would  give  it  careful 
and  honest  consideration  has  been  voted  down  in  this 
Senate,  and  it  is  better  to  vote  the  bill  down  than  it  is  to 
go  to  the  people  with  a  measure  which  shall  resemble  the 
apples  which  grew  in  the  region  of  that  fated  plain  on  which 
once  stood  the  city  of  Sodom.  We  may  make  this  bill 
look  like  a  beautiful  remedy ;  we  may  call  it  a  bill  to  punish 
trusts,  but  when  you  attempt  to  put  it  in  operation  it 
will  be 

Like  that  Dead  Sea  fruit, 

All  ashes  to  the  taste; 

or  it  will  be  found  to  be  a  blow  struck  at  the  legitimate 
industries  of  the  country  such  as  they  will  not  recover 
from  in  years  and  years. 

The  regulation  of  trusts  was  one  of  the  legacies  of 
the  McKinley  administration,  the  responsibilities  of 
which  were  assumed  by  President  Roosevelt,  and  it 
was  one  of  the  first  problems  left  unsolved  at  the  time 
of  McKinley's  death  with  which  his  successor  under 
took  to  grapple.  When  Senator  Platt  met  the  new 
President  at  Farmington,  a  few  weeks  after  the  change 
of  administration,  they  discussed  the  project  which  Mr. 
Roosevelt  even  then  had  in  mind  for  the  further  regu 
lation  of  combinations  of  capital.  On  returning  home, 
the  Senator  examined  the  authorities  with  care,  and  on 
November  13,  1901,  he  wrote  to  the  President  as 
follows : 

Since  I  saw  you  at  Farmington,  I  have  been  reading  up 
the  cases  decided  by  the  Supreme  Court,  relating  to  the 
business  of  trust  organizations,  with  the  result  that  I  am 
quite  doubtful  whether  Congress  can  command  the  power  to 
regulate  interstate  commerce,  going  so  far  as  to  force  cor 
porations  doing  an  interstate  business  to  make  reports  to 
United  States  officials.  It  seems  to  me  that  the  Supreme 
Court  confines  the  power  of  regulation  to  the  courts  alone, 


446  Orville  H.  Platt 

and  holds  that  jurisdiction  does  not  attach  to  the  commerce 
until  the  articles  of  commerce  are  delivered  to  the  common 
carrier  for  transportation  to  another  State.  The  court 
will  have  to  go  further  than  it  has  gone  yet,  to  hold  that 
the  power  to  regulate  commerce  includes  also  the  right  to 
regulate  the  corporation,  and  the  language  of  the  opinions 
seems  to  me  to  indicate  that  it  had  decided  otherwise.  The 
court  might  possibly  hold  that  a  statute  of  that  sort,  if 
passed  by  Congress,  would  raise  a  political,  and  not  a 
judicial  question,  and  get  around  it  in  that  way. 

I  write  this  because  I  very  much  desire  the  enactment 
of  such  legislation,  if  it  would  be  constitutional,  and  yet 
I  would  not  wish  you  to  recommend  specific  legislation, 
which,  if  enacted,  would  be  declared  unconstitutional 
by  the  courts.  I  do  not  go  so  far  as  to  say  that  in  my 
judgment,  the  court  would  so  hold,  but  I  fear  it  would. 
It  is  a  question  that  requires  careful  study — more  careful 
than  I  have  yet  been  able  to  give  to  it. 

The  closing  sentence  of  this  letter  was  strikingly 
characteristic  of  the  man.  He  never  felt  that  he  had 
given  sufficient  thought  or  enough  careful  study  to 
any  subject,  even  though  he  had  penetrated  to  the 
depths.  He  still  wished  for  more  time  and  felt  that 
he  had  not  exhausted  all  sources  of  information.  It 
was  a  quality  which  stood  the  Roosevelt  administration 
in  good  stead,  for  during  three  years  of  strenuous 
battling  with  economic  problems  the  President  found 
the  Connecticut  Senator  constantly  at  his  shoulder 
dispensing  sane  encouragement  derived  from  faithful 
thought.  With  the  President's  determination  faith 
fully  to  enforce  existing  laws  he  was  in  complete  accord ; 
but  not  so  with  the  proposal  to  adopt  a  constitutional 
amendment  giving  Congress  greater  power  over  corpo 
rations.  He  favored  the  creation  of  the  Bureau  of  Cor- 


Regulation  of  Corporations  447 

porations  in  the  Department  of  Commerce  and  Labor 
when  that  department  was  organized  in  1903,  and  was 
glad  to  see  $500,000  appropriated  to  insure  the  more 
vigorous  prosecution  of  illegal  combinations  of  capital, 
but  he  opposed  more  drastic  anti-trust  legislation 
during  the  same  session  of  Congress.  Mr.  Littlefield 
of  Maine  had  handled  in  the  House  a  bill  requiring 
corporations  engaged  in  interstate  commerce  to  make 
returns,  prohibiting  rebates  and  discriminations,  and 
the  use  of  interstate  commerce  to  destroy  competition. 
It  embodied  about  everything  in  the  way  of  anti-trust 
regulation  which  had  ever  been  demanded,  and  when 
it  came  to  a  vote,  Democrats  and  Republicans,  indis 
criminately,  scrambled  to  get  their  names  written 
right  in  the  record  so  that  it  passed  unanimously, 
only  six  representatives  expressing  dissent  by  answer 
ing  "present"  when  their  names  were  called.  When 
the  bill  reached  the  Senate  the  Judiciary  Committee 
directed  a  favorable  report.  Mr.  Hoar  as  Chairman 
presented  it.  No  sooner  had  Mr.  Hoar  concluded  than 
Mr.  Platt  was  on  his  feet.  "I  rise  to  say  for  myself 
that  as  a  member  of  the  Judiciary  Committee  I  cannot 
concur  in  the  report  which  has  just  been  made."  He 
observed : 

Of  course  this  is  not  the  time  or  place  to  give  reasons 
for  my  dissent,  but  briefly  they  may  be  stated  thus:  A 
large  proportion  of  the  bill,  that  which  came  over  from  the 
House,  I  think  has  been  more  wisely  and  appropriately 
treated  in  legislation  which  has  been  already  enacted  at 
this  session ;  and  as  to  the  new  matter  proposed  by  amend 
ments,  I  think  there  are  unconstitutional  provisions  in 
them,  and  that  if  they  were  within  the  constitutional 
authority  of  Congress,  they  are  mischievous  and  would 
work  great  injury  to  the  business  of  the  United  States. 


448  Orville  H.  Platt 

Nothing  more  was  heard  of  the  bill  in  the  Senate; 
conservative  counsels  prevailed,  and  a  measure  which 
had  been  regarded  with  political  favor  slept  on  the  cal 
endar  till  the  Congress  came  to  an  end.  Thus  he  held 
an  even  course,  discouraging  extravagance  of  legislation 
on  the  one  hand  while  on  the  other  urging  a  wise  re 
straint  of  capital  and  the  maintenance  of  law. 

He  did  not  hesitate  to  impress  his  convictions  upon 
those  of  his  acquaintance  who  were  allied  to  great  cor 
porations.  To  one  of  them  he  wrote  in  the  last  month 
of  his  life : 

All  this  railroad  and  corporation  business  by  which  the 
country  is  drained  of  its  money  to  build  up  enterprises 
upon  a  capitalization  of  two  or  three  times  the  actual 
value  of  the  property  is  what  is  running  us  to  the  devil  at 
railroad  speed,  and  whenever  Congress  gets  an  opportunity 
to  put  its  foot  on  it,  it  ought  to  do  it. 

Shortly  after  the  election  in  1904  he  wrote: 

I  do  not  believe  that  any  very  radical  things  are  going 
to  be  done  this  winter,  either  in  Congress  or  at  the  White 
House,  but  I  shall  probably  know  better  by  and  by.  I 
myself  feel  that  the  beef  trust  ought  to  be  pursued,  and  I 
think  that  the  tobacco  trust  needs  a  little  anti-trust  medi 
cine;  still,  that  there  is  going  to  be  a  general  drive  at 
corporations,  I  think  very  improbable. 

The  cry  against  political  contributions  from  corpora 
tions  was  loud  in  the  closing  days  of  the  campaign  of 
1904,  but  he  could  see  no  special  reason  why  it  should 
be  heeded.  Writing  a  few  days  after  the  election  to 
William  E.  Chandler,  who  had  been  impressing  upon 
him  the  importance  of  prohibiting  such  contributions 
he  said: 


Regulation  of  Corporations  449 

I  do  not  quite  share  your  feeling  that  we  have  got  to 
stop  political  contributions  from  corporations.  I  do  not 
believe  in  a  great  campaign  fund.  I  was  glad  that  we  were 
not  going  to  have  a  large  one  this  year.  I  think  the  fault 
lies  in  the  magnitude  of  the  money  which  has  heretofore 
been  raised  for  campaign  purposes,  rather  than  in  the  fact 
that  corporations  may  have  contributed.  "Corporation" 
is  a  very  elastic  word.  I  presume  the  Concord  Monitor  is 
a  corporation — at  any  rate,  almost  every  newspaper  in  the 
country  is  now,  and  I  know  of  no  reason  why  the  ordinary 
corporations  should  not  assist  in  the  raising  of  a  reasonable 
campaign  fund.  You  certainly  cannot  draw  the  line 
between  a  corporation,  as  such,  and  individuals  who  are 
members  of  it.  The  thing  to  do  in  my  judgment,  is  to 
frown  upon  the  raising  of  an  excessive  campaign  fund. 

In  the  consideration  of  the  income  tax  provision 
of  the  Wilson-Gorman  Tariff  bill"  Senator  Platt  had  a 
further  opportunity  to  demonstrate  his  fair-mindedness 
with  progress!  veness  and  conservatism  combined. 
While  he  opposed  the  income  tax  as  then  proposed, 
he  did  not  declare  his  opposition  to  the  principle  in 
volved,  but  in  debating  the  question  he  took  occasion 
to  express  his  opinion  on  the  advisability  of  imposing 
such  a  tax  on  corporations.  In  a  speech  delivered  on 
June  22,  1894,  he  declared  that  his  objections  to  the 
tax  as  proposed,  were  twofold. 

First,  that  it  was  unnecessary  for  the  purpose  of 
raising  sufficient  revenue  and  was  resorted  to  as  a 
means  of  breaking  down  the  system  of  protective 
custom  duties;  and  second,  that  its  provisions  were 
extremely  faulty,  inequitable,  unjust,  and,  by  their  com 
plication,  difficult  of  execution.  If  it  were  a  necessary 
tax  and  were  justly  and  fairly  constructed,  he  should 
not  make  any  opposition  to  it.  If  the  necessities 


450  Orville  H.  Platt 

of  the  Government  required  the  imposition  of  some 
tax  to  raise  revenue  over  and  beyond  what  might  be 
raised  from  customs  duties  and  duties  upon  tobacco 
and  spirits,  he  should  regard  the  income  tax  as  the 
next  best  method  of  taxation,  but  it  should  not  be 
resorted  to  when  the  necessities  of  the  Government  did 
not  require  it  simply  for  the  purpose  of  breaking  down 
the  protective  system,  or  for  the  purpose  of  conciliating 
those  who  objected.  He  declared  that  the  rights  of 
property  were  just  as  sacred  as  the  rights  of  life  and 
liberty  and  that  no  country  which  had  not  a  just  regard 
for  the  right  of  private  property  could  go  on  pro 
gressively  as  a  republic: 

I  do  not  understand  the  prejudice  against  the  accumu 
lation  of  wealth.  I  can  understand  why  it  is  that  there 
should  be  a  prejudice  against  people  getting  wealth  by  im 
proper  means.  I  can  understand  why  it  should  be  thought 
to  be  a  great  evil  that  people  should  be  able  in  a  country  to 
acquire  large  fortunes  by  illegitimate  methods,  by  methods 
which  the  common  judgment  of  mankind  does  not  approve ; 
but  how  it  is  possible  that  there  should  be  a  prejudice 
against  any  man,  who  by  industry,  enterprise,  frugality, 
economy,  and  good  judgment  in  investment  has  accumu 
lated  property,  I  cannot  understand.  I  do  not  believe 
there  is  any  such  real  prejudice  existing. 

I  believe  that  demagogues  appeal  to  prejudice,  appeal 
to  a  sentiment  which  is  perhaps  to  be  found  in  almost 
every  human  breast,  when  they  appeal  to  people  to  take 
such  action,  political  or  legislative,  as  will  in  some  way 
interfere  with  and  cripple  people  who  are  better  off  than 
they  are.  There  never  can  be  an  equal  distribution  of 
wealth.  If  there  were  to  be  an  equal  distribution  of  wealth, 
its  holding  would  soon  be  unequal.  The  history  of  civili 
zation  shows  that  there  never  will  be  and  there  never  can 
be  any  equal  holding  of  wealth. 


Regulation  of  Corporations  451 

Even  if  the  wild  idea  of  having  everything  owned  by 
the  State  could  be  adopted  there  would  soon  be  found 
ways  in  which  certain  individuals  would  acquire  substan 
tially  great  wealth,  while  others  would  be  in  a  state  of 
comparative  poverty.  .  .  .  This  beautiful  idea  of  every 
thing  in  common  and  every  one  having  just  as  much  as 
any  one  else  is  impracticable  in  this  world. 

Now,  I  say  nothing  in  defence  of  those  who  acquire 
fortunes  improperly,  and  yet  there  seems  to  be  a  prevailing 
idea  that  because  some  people  acquire  fortunes  improperly 
therefore  the  cry  should  be  raised — "Down  with  every 
man  who  owns  anything."  All  the  ideas  of  the  past,  the 
acquisition  of  property  and  the  accumulation  of  wealth  by 
means  which  every  one  says  is  legitimate,  which  the  com 
mon  judgment  of  mankind  approves,  are  to  be  thrown  to 
the  winds,  and  if  any  one  has  any  money  he  is  to  be  mulct 
in  some  way  and  his  property  taken  away  from  him. 

I  have  no  sympathy  with  that  kind  of  an  idea,  whether 
it  comes  from  one  party  or  another  or  from  one  section  or 
another.  The  right  of  property  lies  at  the  foundation 
of  government;  the  idea  of  the  protection  of  property  lies 
at  the  foundation  of  all  governments.  The  Democratic 
party  will  make  nothing  by  attempting  to  favor  the  wild 
notions  about  the  inequality  which  exists  in  the  country 
and  the  wild  notions  which  seem  to  make  it  criminal  almost 
for  any  one  by  industry,  enterprise,  earnestness,  and  good 
fortune  to  have  acquired  some  property.  .  .  . 

Mr.  President,  a  large  portion  of  this  inveighing  against 
any  one  who  has,  by  proper  means,  acquired  some  property 
comes,  after  all,  from  the  passions  of  envy  and  covetous- 
ness.  A  farmer  upon  his  farm  in  the  West,  having  a  hard 
time  to  get  along,  finding  that  his  crops  do  not  bring  him 
enough  to  yield  what  he  considers  a  fair  return  to  enable 
him  to  live  as  he  thinks  he  is  entitled  to  live,  draws  his 
load  of  corn  to  town.  He  finds  there  a  man  who  was  a 
fanner,  but  has  owned  some  lots  where  a  city  has  grown 
up.  He  finds  that  his  old  time  farmer  friend,  who  was  in 


452  Orville  H.  Platt 

the  same  situation  with  himself  financially,  has  sold  out 
his  city  lots  and  has  now  become  a  nabob,  a  millionaire; 
and  immediately  he  begins  to  be  envious  of  his  former 
associate.  He  is  not  willing  that  he  should  have  the  benefit 
of  his  fortunate  situation  and  fortunate  trade.  He  begins 
to  think  that  in  some  way  or  other  he  snould  have  been  the 
man  to  enjoy  that  fortune.  Then  he  begins  to  envy  the 
man  who  has  acquired  the  fortune.  .  .  . 

Every  one  fixes  his  own  standard  of  wealth,  and  then  he 
wants  to  make  that  wealth  within  a  twelvemonth,  and  live 
all  the  while  during  the  twelvemonth  as  if  he  had  it  on 
hand  on  the  first  day  of  January.  That  is  the  foundation 
of  this  populistic  sentiment  in  this  country.  It  is  not  that 
they  complain  so  much  of  the  improper  and  unequal  dis 
tribution  of  wealth  as  it  is  the  feeling  of  jealousy  that  they 
have  not  been  able  to  acquire  as  much  wealth  as  they 
desire. 

Mr.  President,  you  cannot  conduct  a  government  suc 
cessfully  by  giving  way  to  that  sort  of  feeling;  and  it  is 
not  statesmanlike  to  appeal  to  that  sort  of  feeling. 

But  without  regard  to  the  merits  of  an  income  tax 
he  asserted  that  there  was  no  reason  why  the  tax  should 
apply  to  a  corporation  as  a  corporation.  It  was  no 
part  of  any  income  scheme  that  had  ever  been  put  in 
operation  or  devised  in  the  world,  and  he  declared  his 
opposition  to  it  without  qualification: 

It  is  the  sentiment  that  in  some  way  or  other  the  Legis 
lature  must  get  at  the  corporations,  which  accounts  for 
the  tax  upon  the  incomes  of  corporations  in  this  bill.  It 
has  been  a  remark  made  more  than  once  in  the  Senate,  and 
so  publicly  that  I  may  refer  to  it  during  the  consideration 
of  this  Tariff  bill,  that  the  persons  trying  to  pass  it  desire 
to  "  get  at  the  rich  men  "  and  that  is  why  this  tax  is  laid  on 
corporations.  They  wish  some  way  or  other  to  get  at 
corporations. 


Regulation  of  Corporations  453 

This  taxing  of  corporations  by  an  income  tax  has  no 
precedent  to  sustain  it.  It  has  never  been  advocated  by 
any  political  economists  in  any  scheme  of  income  taxation. 
There  is  no  more  reason  why  we  should  tax  the  income  of 
a  corporation  because  it  is  a  corporation  than  why  we  should 
tax  the  income  of  a  partnership  because  it  is  a  partnership. 
The  truth  about  this  matter  of  corporations  is  just  this: 
A  corporation  should  be  treated  as  an  individual.  If  it 
behaves  itself  it  should  be  respected ;  if  it  undertakes  to  do 
wrong  it  should  be  restrained.  A  corporation  properly  con 
ducted,  conducted  on  principles  of  equity  and  fair  dealing,  is 
a  benefit  to  the  country  and  our  civilization.  More  than  that, 
it  is  an  indispensable  agent  of  our  civilization.  Its  advent 
marks  progress.  If  it  goes  into  unfair  dealing,  inequitable 
doings,  then  it  is  a  disgrace  and  a  shame.  But  that  is  true 
of  the  individual  just  as  it  is  of  the  corporation.  .  .  . 

It  will  stop  the  development  of  my  State  to  tax  these 
corporations.  No  one  is  going  hereafter  to  form  a  joint- 
stock  corporation  to  carry  on  business  if  the  net  profits 
of  that  corporation  are  to  have  an  income  tax  of  two  per 
cent,  imposed  upon  them,  when  business  carried  on  in 
another  way  is  not  required  to  pay  a  tax  as  a  business, 
and  when  a  partnership  business  is  not  taxed.  We  shall 
have  no  more  of  these  most  beneficent  corporations  scat 
tered  all  over  my  State,  the  hum  of  whose  wheels  and  of 
whose  industry  can  be  heard  the  moment  you  enter  the 
State,  as  you  pass  through  it,  and  until  you  leave  it,  no 
matter  in  what  direction  you  may  go.  ... 

What  should  be  the  scheme  of  an  income  tax?  It  should 
be  to  tax  the  personal  incomes  of  individuals  which  exceed 
the  amount  exempted,  and  in  that  way  you  get  all  the 
income  of  the  country.  But  here  you  will  observe  that 
confusion  is  created  by  trying  to  tax  the  corporation. 
There  is  no  necessity  for  it,  because,  if  you  put  the  income 
tax  upon  personal  incomes,  you  reach  all  the  earnings  of 
the  corporation  in  the  hands  of  the  individuals  whose 
incomes  exceed  the  exemption.  .  .  . 


454  Orville  H.  Platt 

If  we  must  have  an  income  tax,  the  honest,  just,  equit 
able  way  is  to  make  a  small  exemption  and  tax  whatever 
income  the  individual  has  above  that  exemption.  By 
that  way  you  reach  everything  and  make  everyone  pay 
in  proportion  to  what  he  is  worth.  The  whole  matter  of 
going  outside  of  it  to  reach  corporations  is  founded  on 
the  idea — I  had  almost  called  it  an  insane  idea — that  be 
cause  a  business  is  conducted  under  an  association  which 
is  called  a  corporation  it  deserves  to  be  struck  at  by 
legislation. 


CHAPTER  XXXIV 

THE  INTERSTATE  COMMERCE  LAW 

The  Initiatory  Legislation  of  1887 — Opposes  Anti-Pooling  Clause 
— Position  Justified  by  Events — Favors  Elkins  Bill — Opposed 
to  Hasty  Legislation  in  1905. — "Too  Great  a  Subject  to  Play 
with." 

A  CONSPICUOUS  opportunity  came  to  Senator 
Platt  to  demonstrate  his  conservatism,  sound 
sense,  and  courage  in  matters  affecting  the  transporta 
tion  interests  of  the  country  at  the  time  of  the  enact 
ment  of  the  Interstate  Commerce  law  in  1887.  In  the 
preparation  of  this  law  he  played  a  vitally  important 
part,  and  to  him  in  its  effective  features  the  final  form 
of  the  law  is  due.  He  was  the  second  member  of  the 
Select  Committee  on  Interstate  Commerce,  and  to  his 
constructive  ability  and  his  capacity  as  a  lawyer  the 
Committee  instinctively  turned.  The  comprehensive 
ness  of  the  work  which  he  performed  on  this  measure 
as  on  many  others  will  never  be  known  except  to  those 
few  who  watched  him  day  by  day  and  took  note  of 
the  unobtrusive,  modest,  efficient  way  in  which  he 
grasped  each  problem  as  it  arose. 

There  was  one  provision  of  the  law  which  porjular 
clamor  finally  forced  upon  Congress  for  which  he  could 
not  stand.  This  was  the  so-called  "  anti-pooling 
clause."  He  opposed  it  in  the  Senate  committee,  in  the 
Conference  Committee,  and  finally  in  the  Senate  after 
the  Senate  conferrees  had  yielded  to  the  demand  of  the 

455 


456  Orville  H.  Platt 

House.  He  also  vigorously  opposed  the  amendment 
to  the  ''short-haul"  clause  which  was  proposed  by  the 
Conference  Committee.  The  accuracy  of  his  political 
foresight  was  never  more  clearly  manifest  than  in  his 
course  at  this  time.  He  argued  that  to  forbid  pooling 
arrangements  would  necessarily  compel  railroads  to 
consolidate.  That  is  exactly  what  happened.  He 
argued  that  the  substitution  in  the  short-haul  clause 
of  the  words  "the  shorter  being  included  within  the 
longer  distance"  in  place  of  the  words  "and  from  the 
same  original  point  of  departure  or  to  the  same  point 
of  arrival"  would  lead  to  confusion  of  interpretation 
by  courts  and  commissions.  That  also  happened. 
It  is  not  too  much  to  say  that  if  the  bill  as  originally 
favored  by  Senator  Platt,  without  the  amendments 
forced  by  the  House  upon  the  Conference  Committee 
and  the  Senate,  had  become  a  la  win  1887,  the  demoraliz 
ing  railroad  rate  agitation  of  1906  would  never  have 
taken  place.  Such  moderation  as  Senator  Platt  advo 
cated  at  the  earlier  time  would  have  obviated  the 
evils  which  President  Roosevelt  set  out  to  correct 
twenty  years  later.1 

»  "  As  a  member  of  the  Senate  committee  Mr.  Platt  was  indefati 
gable  in  his  study  of  this  difficult  subject.  His  speeches  in  oppo 
sition  to  certain  sections  of  the  Interstate  Commerce  act  which  he 
believed  to  be  ill-judged  are  without  doubt  the  ablest  presentation 
of  the  subject  ever  made  by  any  man  in  the  United  States  Congress. 
Had  Mr.  Platt's  advice  been  taken  at  that  time  many  of  the  diffi 
culties  under  which  we  have1  suffered  both  financially  and  indus 
trially  in  the  matter  of  railroad  policy  would  have  been  much 
mitigated." — Arthur  T.  Hadley,  April,  1905. 

"In  the  Interstate  Commerce  law  of  1887  was  included  a  pro 
hibition  of  the  pooling  by  competitive  railway  carriers  of  freight 
or  the  earnings  of  freights.  That  was  right.  The  old  money  pool 
and  freight  pool  was  a  harmful  thing  to  commerce  and  a  harmful 
thing  to  the  railroads  engaged  in  the  commerce,  but  Senator  Platt 
of  Connecticut,  a  great  statesman  and  one  of  the  most  faithful 


The  Interstate  Commerce  Law       457 

On  January  6th  and  7th,  when  the  conference  report 
on  the  Interstate  Commerce  bill  was  before  the  Senate, 
Mr.  Platt  made  his  only  elaborate  speech  in  connection 
with  the  legislation.  It  was  his  habit  not  to  argue  with 
the  Senate  unless  argument  was  necessary,  but  in  this 
case  he  felt  that  there  were  things  for  him  to  say  which 
could  not  be  so  effectively  said  by  another : 

I  am  in  favor  of  legislation  for  the  regulation  of  the 
business  of  the  railroads  of  the  country  within  the  extreme 
limits  of  the  Constitution  which  I  understand  to  be  for 
the  regulation  of  that  portion  of  the  business  done  upon 
the  railroads  of  the  country  which  comes  within  the  defi 
nition  of  "interstate  commerce."  I  wish  that  it  were  so 
that  Congress  had  power  to  go  further  in  the  subject  of 
railroad  legislation.  .  .  . 

The  basis  upon  which  we  must  legislate,  as  it  seems  to 
me,  is  simple.  The  justification  for  legislation  is  that  the 
railroad  business,  unlike  other  business,  is  of  a  mixed 
nature.  It  is  partly  private  business  and  partly  public 
business.  I  think  that  we  should  refrain  as  far  as  possible 
from  legislating  to  affect  purely  private  business  in  this 
country.  But  when  a  private  business  is  "charged  with 
a  public  use, "  as  the  phrase  is,  when  the  railroad  undertakes 
to  discharge  a  public  duty  as  well  as  to  conduct  its  private 
business,  it  is  eminently  proper  and  necessary  that  there 

men  who  ever  served  this  country  in  the  Senate  at  Washington, 
tried  to  the  best  of  his  ability  to  modify  that  proposition  so  as  to 
permit  railway  corporations  engaged  in  interstate  commerce  to 
make  traffic  contracts  reasonable  in  their  character,  to  be  made 
public,  and  to  be  subject  to  abrogation  by  the  commission  whenever 
the  public  interest  required  it.  I  opposed  that. 

"But,  gentlemen,  Senator  Platt  was  right,  and  I  and  those  who 
were  with  me  were  wrong.  Much  of  what  is  found  to  be  ob 
jectionable  in  the  situation  of  to-day  would  have  been  averted  if 
the  legislation  in  respect  of  which  I  speak  had  been  enacted." — 
John  C.  Spooner,  at  the  dinner  of  the  N.  Y.  Chamber  of  Commerce, 
November  2 1,  1907. 


458  Orville  H.  Platt 

should  be  legislation  to  make  sure  that  the  public  business 
is  conducted  for  the  public  welfare,  that  its  public  duty 
is  faithfully  discharged,  and  that  no  abuses  are  allowed 
to  exist. 

I  said  the  basis  of  legislation  was  simple.  It  should 
be  the  enforcement  of  the  common  law — that,  and  nothing 
more.  Congress  may  not  justify  itself,  in  my  judgment, 
in  stepping  outside  of  the  well-defined  principles  of  the 
common  law  in  legislation.  Those  principles  affecting 
interstate  railway  business  have  had  a  growth  of  centuries. 
They  provide  the  remedy  for  every  difficulty  which  can 
arise  in  the  operation  of  railroads.  The  application  of 
those  principles  to  every  evil  or  abuse  which  can  be  charged 
against  railroads  and  railroad  operations  will  solve  the 
difficulty  and  remedy  the  evil.  The  difficulty  is  only  in 
the  application. 

So,  then,  I  think  we  should  confine  our  legislation  to 
the  enforcement  of  the  common  law.  That  is  simple. 
It  is  only  this;  it  can  be  expressed  in  a  word:  The  rates 
charged  by  common  carriers  must  be  reasonable,  and  such 
carriers  must  charge  only  like  rates  for  like  services.  That 
is  all.  It  has  been  the  intention  of  this  committee  to  con 
fine  legislation  within  these  limits.  A  careful  study  of  the 
bill  as  it  was  passed  by  the  Senate  will  show  that  we  did 
not  go  outside  of  those  limits,  that  we  undertook  to  make 
no  new  law  for  the  regulation  of  railroads  and  the  business 
of  railroads  and  interstate  commerce  in  this  country,  but 
that  we  did  undertake  to  hold  the  railroad  management 
of  this  country  up  to  the  strict  letter  of  the  common  law. 

On  the  question  of  pooling  he  spoke  with  special 
emphasis  for  on  this  he  felt  deeply : 

I  challenge  any  man  to  show  that  the  object  or  purpose 
or  faithful  observance  of  a  pooling  contract — by  which 
I  mean  the  apportionment  of  the  competitive  traffic,  or 
of  the  earnings  derived  from  such  competitive  traffic — can 


The  Interstate  Commerce  Law        459 

be  anything  else  except  the  maintenance  of  stable  rates. 
It  is  supposed,  I  think,  on  the  part  of  the  public,  that  in 
some  way  these  railroad  pools  fix  unreasonable  rates. 

I  challenge  proof  of  it.  I  heard  petitions  presented  at 
that  desk  this  morning  praying  for  the  passage  of  this  bill. 
For  what  purpose?  To  prevent  excessive  rates,  dis 
criminations,  and  pooling.  It  shows  the  utter  and  la 
mentable  ignorance  of  what  pooling  contracts  really  are. 
There  is  not  a  man  who  ever  studied  them,  there  is  not 
a  man  who  ever  investigated  their  operation,  who  will 
not  tell  you  that  the  main  purpose  of  them  is  to  prevent 
discriminations;  and  yet  here  we  have  a  bill  in  which  we 
propose  to  make  criminal  the  means  which  the  railroad 
companies  adopt  to  prevent  discrimination.  Others  may 
agree  to  it  for  the  sake  of  getting  legislation.  I  will  not. 

It  is  rarely  that  any  public  man  predicts  with  preci 
sion  the  effect  of  legislation  which  he  favors  or  opposes, 
but  in  this  instance  the  exceptional  happened.  Certain 
paragraphs  of  the  speech  which  he  entitled,  "  Shall 
Railroad  Co-operation  be  Declared  Criminal?"  carried 
the  genius  of  prophecy,  because  their  inspiration  came 
from  simple  common-sense : 

I  wish  to  emphasize  this  point:  George  Stephenson  said 
that  where  combination  was  possible,  competition  was 
impossible;  and  no  man  ever  said  a  truer  thing.  This 
bill  leaves  open  and  invites  the  worst  kind  of  combination 
which  this  country  may  fear — that  is,  the  combination  and 
consolidation  of  railroad  corporate  capital.  .  .  . 

Why,  Mr.  President,  the  monopolies  of  this  country 
are  built  on  the  graves  of  weak  competitors,  and  this  bill 
invites  that  grand  monopoly  of  railroad  capital  in  this 
country  which  will  be  built  upon  the  graves  of  railroads  that 
are  not  able  to  stand  in  the  competition,  which  railroad 
monopoly  will  be  the  master  of  the  people.  I  have  not 
learned  that  such  results  are  to  be  regarded  with  favor. 


460  Orville  H.  Platt 

I  can  not  unlearn  all  the  teachings  of  my  youth  at  the 
demand  of  these  economists,  these  professors  of  political 
economy,  these  railroad  men,  and  these  socialists.  I  believe 
that  it  is  better  to  keep  business  in  a  good  many  hands, 
if  you  can,  than  to  concentrate  it  in  a  few  hands.  I  believe 
it  is  better  to  let  the  little  stores  in  the  country  live  than 
to  build  up  the  great  mercantile  establishments  at  their 
expense.  I  believe  it  is  better  to  let  the  little  factories 
live  than  to  build  up  the  great  manufacturing  corporations 
at  their  expense.  I  believe  it  is  better  to  let  the  weak 
railroads  live  in  this  country  than  it  is  to  build  up  one 
gigantic  railroad  corporation  which  shall  occupy  to  the 
railroad  business  of  the  country  the  same  position  which 
the  Western  Union  Telegraph  Company  occupies  to  the 
telegraph  business  of  the  country. 

I  believe  we  are  holding  up  a  false  standard  to  our 
young  men.  I  believe  that  the  "little  farm  well  tilled" 
is  better  than  many  leagues  of  land  in  one  ownership  tilled 
by  capitalists  whose  laborers  come  and  go,  and  who  have 
little  sympathy  with  the  proprietors;  that  a  "little  house 
well  filled"  is  better  than  the  marble  palace  with  its  in 
terior  decorations  of  gold,  its  hangings  of  silk,  and  artistic 
carpets  from  the  marts  of  foreign  nations,  better  in  their 
tendency  to  the  advancement  of  the  prosperity  of  the 
nation  and  the  welfare  of  the  people.  But  this  bill  pre 
sents  these  alternatives. 

Although  he  failed  to  secure  legislation  in  exactly 
the  form  he  sought,  he  was  gratified  to  have  been  so 
largely  instrumental  in  placing  in  the  statutes  an  act 
embodying  needed  regulation  of  interstate  railway 
traffic,  and  he  supported  subsequently  such  measures 
as  were  proposed  to  perfect  the  act,  especially  the 
Elkins  Act  of  1903,  which  met  the  evils  of  rebates. 
It  was  never  possible  to  secure  the  passage  of  a  pooling 
bill,  though  more  than  one  attempt  was  made. 


The  Interstate  Commerce  Law       461 

When  President  Roosevelt  incorporated  in  his  annual 
message  of  December,  1904,  his  recommendation  of 
legislation  still  further  to  curb  the  railroads,  he  felt 
that  a  mistake  had  been  made,  not  because  he  was 
opposed  to  additional  restrictions,  but  because  he  feared 
the  introduction  of  the  subject  just  then  at  the  begin 
ning  of  a  short  term  of  Congress  would  lead  to  fruitless 
agitation  and  a  public  demand  for  legislation  which 
could  not  be  wisely  considered  in  so  brief  a  time.  As 
to  the  policy  of  bringing  the  subject  to  the  front 
at  that  particular  moment  he  held  a  clearly  defined 
opinion : 

I  am  sorry  that  the  President  made  the  recommendation 
that  he  did — that  is,  in  particular.  It  was  very  proper, 
of  course,  for  him  to  call  the  attention  of  Congress  to  the 
subject,  suggesting  legislation  calculated  to  remedy  any 
defects  or  abuses  that  exist,  and  I  do  not  think  that  he  had 
really  considered  what  the  effect  of  giving  to  the  Interstate 
Commerce  Commission  power  to  fix  a  rate  which  should  go 
into  operation  at  once,  might  be.  I  do  not  think  he  would 
now  make  just  that  recommendation,  having  had  oppor 
tunity  to  study  the  matter  more  at  length. 

His  foresight  again  was  justified  when  in  writing 
to  a  New  Haven  editor  a  week  after  the  message  had 
gone  to  Congress,  he  said: 

I  should  not  be  surprised  if  this  proposition  to  give  to 
the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission  power  to  declare  fixed 
rates  unreasonable,  and  to  fix  what  is  called  a  reasonable 
rate,  to  stand  until  such  action  is  reversed  by  the  courts, 
so  got  possession  of  the  public  mind  as  to  overshadow  the 
tariff  question  entirely,  and  make  people  forget  it. 

The  cry  for  immediate  action  by  Congress  went  up 
from  every  corner  of  the  United  States,  and  the  House 


462  Orville  H.  Platt 

Committee  on  Interstate  and  Foreign  Commerce,  with 
suspicious  alacrity,  reported  a  bill  to  satisfy  the  cry. 
Mr.  Platt  foresaw  that  the  same  popular  pressure  which 
had  moved  the  House  Committee  to  ill-considered 
action  would  be  turned  upon  the  Senate.  His  fore 
bodings  he  expressed  in  a  letter  to  S.  C.  Dunham  of 
Hartford  on  February  2,  1905: 

This  railway  rate- making  business  has  assumed  the  form 
of  a  craze,  and  I  am  told  that  the  House  of  Representatives 
will  pass  the  bill  which  has  been  reported  from  the  Com 
mittee  there,  probably  unanimously,  which  will  throw  it 
upon  the  Senate  at  a  time  in  the  session  when  it  is  utterly 
impossible  to  give  the  matter  intelligent  consideration, 
and  then  the  Senate  will  be  accused  of  acting  in  the  interest 
of  railroads  and  corporations  and  be  made  to  bear  the  re 
sponsibility  of  what  will  be  called  "killing  the  bill. "  It  is 
not  a  pleasant  situation  to  contemplate.  I  do  not  know 
but  that  the  craze  may  so  affect  the  Senate  that  the  bill 
may  be  hurried  through  the  Senate  without  consideration. 
For  one,  I  am  willing  to  pass  any  proper  and  desirable 
legislation  to  remedy  any  evils  or  abuses  in  the  matter  of 
transportation,  but  I  do  not  want  to  do  foolish  and  indis 
creet  things. 

His  premonition  in  regard  to  the  pressure  which 
would  be  brought  to  bear  upon  the  Senate  was  to  have 
a  closer  verification  even  than  he  had  imagined;  for 
before  the  passage  of  the  bill  by  the  House  he  dis 
covered  in  his  own  home  newspaper,  the  Hartford 
C  our  ant,  an  editorial  summons  to  the  Senate  to  push 
the  legislation  through.  He  wrote  at  once  to  the 
editor  of  the  C  our  ant,  his  friend,  Charles  Hopkins 
Clark: 

I  clipped  from  the  Courant  an  editorial  paragraph  which 
I  enclose.  It  surprised  me  just  a  little,  because  I  felt 


The  Interstate  Commerce  Law       463 

sure  that  the  Courant,  at  least,  would  not  want  the  Senate 
to  take  hasty  action  on  so  important  and  complicated  a 
subject  as  this  legislation  relative  to  the  power  of  the  Inter 
state  Commerce  Commission  over  railroad  rates.  I  think 
it  is  quite  safe  to  say  that  there  are  very  few  if  any  Senators 
who  would  not  be  glad  to  do  the  right  thing  about  it,  and 
do  it  at  this  session.  There  ought  to  be  no  Senator  who 
would  be  willing  to  do  an  ill-considered  thing  at  this  or 
any  other  session. 

Now,  just  see  what  the  situation  is.  The  House  has 
had  this  matter  under  consideration  the  entire  session 
until  this  time,  when  a  bill  is  brought  out  of  committee 
which  neither  the  President  nor  the  Committee  is  satisfied 
with,  but  it  is  a  bill,  and  the  House  caucuses  on  it,  and 
directs  a  rule  to  be  brought  in  for  its  passage,  denying  the 
privilege  of  amendment,  with  three  days  for  debate.  Of 
course,  the  House  is  going  to  pass  it  and  send  it  over  to  the 
Senate. 

The  Swayne  case  has  been  sent  over,  and  whatever  the 
opinion  may  be  about  that,  it  must  be  tried  with  all  the 
formalities  and  detail  that  would  be  if  it  were  an  impeach 
ment  of  Judge  Lacomb  of  New  York.  The  House  fooled 
with  that  all  the  session  and  the  managers  are  ready  at 
last  to  go  to  trial  on  the  tenth  day  of  February,  wanting 
until  the  thirteenth,  which  we  refused  to  agree  to.  This 
leaves  just  18  working  days  in  which  to  try  that  case, 
with  67  witnesses  summoned;  to  pass  the  appropriation 
bills,  only  one  of  which  has  become  a  law,  two  being  in 
conference,  leaving  ten  unconsidered,  and  several  of  them 
yet  unpassed  by  the  House,  together  with  all  the  other 
legislation  which  ought  to  be  attended  to. 

Now,  do  you  think  that  we  ought  to  just  simply  take 
that  bill  as  it  comes  from  the  House  and  pass  it  without 
debate  or  consideration,  or  do  you  think  that  it  would 
really  be  better  to  have  the  Committee  consider  this  matter 
during  the  session,  and  get  a  bill  that  would  be  satisfac 
tory  to  the  President,  to  Congress,  and  fair  to  shippers, 


464  Orville  H.  Platt 

railroads,  and  investors?  Is  it  not  too  important  a  sub 
ject  to  be  disposed  of  in  the  way  the  House  has  disposed 
of  it,  and  in  the  way  the  Senate  will  be  obliged  to  dispose 
of  it,  if  it  is  passed  at  this  session? 


Writing  again  to  Mr.  Clark  on  February  isth,  after 
the  passage  of  the  bill  by  the  House,  he  said: 

The  Senate  does  not  balk  ;  it  simply  wants  to  do  the  right 
thing.  I  venture  to  say  that  while  there  were  only  seven 
teen  men  in  the  House  who  voted  against  the  so-called  Rate 
bill,  there  were  not  seventeen  men  in  the  House  of  Repre 
sentatives  who  were  satisfied  with  it,  and  that  the  President 
himself  is  not  satisfied  with  it.  I  can  not  reconcile  it  with 
my  sense  of  duty,  to  pass  a  bill  that  everyone  believes  to  be 
an  imperfect  method,  at  least,  of  effecting  an  object  all 
practically  desire  to  further,  just  because  there  is  a  senti 
ment  that  something  should  be  done  —  a  sentiment  with 
which  I  agree  fully.  I  cannot  legislate  in  that  way.  I 
must  try  to  get  things  right  before  I  support  them  —  at  any 
rate,  from  my  standpoint,  and  in  a  matter  of  this  tremen 
dous  importance,  to  simply  pass  that  bill  without  dis 
cussion  or  consideration  would  be,  to  my  mind,  a  serious 
neglect  of  my  duty  as  a  Senator.  If  I  did  it,  the  people 
ought  to  ask  me  to  come  home.  I  think  everyone  under 
stands  that  there  is  no  opportunity  to  consider  the  bill  — 
to  amend  it,  or  even  discuss  it.  You  do  not  want  bills 
passed  in  that  way  in  the  Connecticut  Legislature. 

I  cannot  help  what  people  think  about  the  Senate.  The 
Senate  is  here  to  do  its  duty,  and  not  to  be  swept  off  its 
feet  by  what  people  may  think  about  it.  This  is  too  great 
a  subject  to  play  with,  by  which  I  mean  that  no  man  who 
respects  himself  and  tries  to  do  his  duty,  ought  to  vote  for 
any  measure  in  which  he  does  not  believe,  or  which  does 
not  satisfy  him,  because  of  public  clamor  directed  toward 
him  personally,  or  the  Senate  of  which  he  is  a  member. 

This  is  the  way  I  would  talk  to  you  if  we  were  together 


The  Interstate  Commerce  Law        465 

discussing  the  matter,  and  I  believe  that  I  conld  convince 
you  that  time  ought  to  be  given  in  the  Senate  to  the  con 
sideration  of  this  measure,  and  sufficient  time  to  make  it 
what  it  should  be  rather  than  what  it  is. 

He  was  saved  the  dreaded  ordeal  of  passing  upon 
the  bill  during  that  session  of  the  Senate,  and  when 
the  question  again  came  before  Congress  his  voice 
was  silent  forever.  What  would  have  been  his  course 
regarding  the  legislation  of  the  following  winter  can 
only  be  conjectured.  The  sole  intimation  of  his  trend 
of  thought  appears  in  a  letter  which  he  wrote  in  January 
to  the  president  of  one  of  the  great  railway  systems  of 
the  United  States: 

There  is  great  force  in  your  suggestion  as  to  additional 
legislation  in  the  way  of  enlarging  the  powers  of  the  Inter 
state  Commerce  Commission,  and  I  think,  on  first  impres 
sion,  that  it  might  be  effectual.  There  seems  to  be  a  craze  on 
this_subject,  especially  in  the  West,  and  it  looks  as  if  some 
legislation  would  pass,  not  at  this  session — perhaps,  at  the 
next.  The  difficulty  is  to  know  what  to  do.  I  have  been 
thinking  about  the  matter,  and  have  wondered  how  some 
thing  like  this  would  be,  namely:  Give  to  the  Commission 
power  to  hear  complaints,  and  if  they  find  that  the  rates 
complained  of  are  unreasonable,  to  suggest  what,  in  their 
judgment,  would  be  reasonable  rates  in  the  case  before 
them.  The  suggested  rate,  however,  not  to  take  effect 
until  upon  an  appeal,  taken  by  the  railroad  company  to 
the  Circuit  Court  in  the  circuit  where  the  rate  complained 
of  is,  and  the  decision  of  that  Court  that  the  rate  is  un 
reasonable,  and  that  the  suggested  rate  of  the  Commission  is 
a  reasonable  one, — upon  such  decision  of  the  Court,  the  rate 
to  take  effect,  such  cases  to  be  expedited  by  the  Court  as 
rapidly  as  practicable.  Appeal  to  the  Court  of  Appeals  to 
be  final  unless  certified  to  the  Supreme  Court  of  Errors. 

This  is  merely  a  crude  suggestion,  but  it  would  do  away 
30 


466  Orville  H.  Platt 

with  rate- making  by  the  Commission,  and  would  give  the 
railroads  an  opportunity  to  get  into  court  for  final  decision ; 
would  do  away  with  the  proposed  transportation  court; 
would  not  provide  for  additional  judges ;  proceeds  upon  the 
idea  that  such  cases  might  be  speedily  heard  by  the  present 
courts. 

Another  suggestion  is,  that  when  the  Commission  might 
have  declared  a  rate  to  be  unreasonable,  and  decided  that 
another  was  reasonable,  that  rate  should  not  go  into  force 
for — say  thirty  or  sixty  days, — meanwhile,  the  railroad 
having  the  right  to  appeal  and  to  apply  to  the  Appellate 
Court  for  a  stay  or  suspension,  to  be  granted  by  the  Court 
if,  on  a  showing,  it  seemed  proper,  during  the  trial  of 
the  appeal.  But,  all  these  things  have  got  to  be  threshed 
out,  and  I  hope  that  we  may  be  able  to  prevent  any  radical 
and  injurious  action.  No  one  knows,  however. 


CHAPTER  XXXV 

A  ROBUST  AMERICAN 

Sturdily  Assertive  in  International  Affairs — The  United  States  a 

World  Power — Sustains  Cleveland's  Venezuelan  Message — 

Arbitration  with  Great  Britain — The  Hague  Treaties. 

IN  all  that  concerns  our  relations  to  other  Powers 
Senator  Platt  was  a  robust  American,  not  in  the 
least  a  jingo — for  his  innate  sense  of  dignity  forbade 
it, — but  one  who  believed  to  the  core  of  his  being  that 
the  United  States  had  a  great  part  to  play  among  the 
nations,  and  that  we  should  ever  be  prepared  for  what 
ever  glory  the  future  might  have  in  store.  His  atti 
tude  with  regard  to  our  occupation  of  the  Philippines 
was  typical  of  his  attitude  in  all  our  dealings  with 
foreign  nations.  "  We  are  not  in  the  Philippines  "  he 
said  "as  the  result  of  premeditation;  we  are  there 
by  the  logic  of  imperative  necessity. "  He  felt  that 
Dewey's  guns  sounded  the  call  to  national  duty,  awak 
ing  a  great  people  to  a  sense  of  its  obligation.  We 
could  never  again  feel  that  we  had  no  interest  in  what 
was  taking  place  in  the  world  outside : 

There  have  always  been  great  epochs  in  the  world's 
history.  I  believe  them  to  be  the  result  of  Divine  Provi 
dence,  and  I  cannot  help  thinking  that  when  the  necessities 
of  the  Spanish  War  compelled  the  United  States  to  plant 
its  flag  on  the  shores  of  Manila  Bay,  the  very  greatest 
epoch  in  the  world's  history  began.1 

i  The  Independent,  August  24,  1899. 

467 


468  Orville  H.  Platt 

He  realized  that  in  our  relations  to  other  nations 
the  universal  rule  of  nature  applied.  We  could  not 
remain  stationary.  We  must  go  forward  or  retreat. 
In  our  history  we  had  never  yet  known  what  it  was 
permanently  to  retreat;  "it  is  our  glory  to  have  ad 
vanced,  and  whenever  we  have  advanced  it  has  been  to 
the  great  and  lasting  benefit  of  mankind.  "  He  never 
conceived  that  our  true  policy  was  one  of  isolation. 
He  had  no  obsession  about  the  awful  perils  of  foreign 
alliances.1 

He  held  that  to  be  a  member  of  the  family  of  nations 
conferred  responsibility  and  created  duties,  that  duty 


i  "  Precisely  how  this  notion  of  our  supposed  policy  grew  up  it 
is  perhaps  difficult  to  explain.  The  sentences  in  Washington's 
Farewell  Address,  and  in  Jefferson's  Inaugural  Message  with  refer 
ence  to  alliances  with  European  nations  have  doubtless  been 
relied  on  as  establishing  such  a  policy  for  this  Government.  Neither 
of  these  utterances  proclaimed  the  indifference  of  the  United 
States  as  to  what  might  take  place  in  the  world,  or  can  be  justly 
cited  as  authority  for  the  doctrine  that  we  should  in  no  way  take 
part  in  such  affairs.  Washington  cautioned  us  to  avoid  'per 
manent  alliances. '  Jefferson  advised  us  to  '  cultivate  peace, 
commerce,  and  honest  friendship  with  all  nations — entangling 
alliances  with  none, '  but  this  was  very  far  from  the  assertion 
that  we  had  no  concern  in  what  might  be  going  on  between  the 
nations  of  the  Old  World,  nor  was  it  so  understood  even  in  those 
early  days.  It  was  permanent  and  entangling  alliances  which 
were  to  be  feared  and  shunned,  and  there  could  never  have  been 
a  purpose  on  the  part  of  Washington  or  Jefferson  to  say  that  our 
interests  were  to  be  neglected,  or  that  as  one  of  the  nations  of  the 
world  we  were  to  have  no  concern  as  to  what  other  nations  might 
do  either  in  derogation  of  those  interests  or  affecting  the  advance 
ment  and  happiness  of  mankind. 

"A  nation  has  no  right  to  live  to  itself  alone.  To  assert  such  a 
right  is  to  contend  for  the  doctrine  that  selfishness  is  right.  Self 
ishness  in  a  nation  is  as  much  worse  than  selfishness  in  the  in 
dividual  as  the  nation  is  stronger  and  more  influential  than  the 
individual." — Speech  at  the  annual  dinner  of  the  New  Haven  Bar 
Association,  Jan.  22,  1903. 


A  Robust  American  469 

corresponded  with  ability  and  power.  When  the 
United  States  was  weak  among  nations  its  people  felt 
that  its  duties  were  circumscribed  by  its  boundaries. 
Upon  the  ground  of  incapacity  our  indifference  might 
have  been  excusable.  We  had  asked  to  be  let  alone, 
and  we  were  let  alone,  so  much  so  that  we  were  scarcely 
recognized  as  one  of  the  family  of  nations,  but  as  we 
grew  in  strength  and  came  to  realize  that  we  ought  in  all 
fairness  to  be  consulted,  the  situation  became  galling: 
"  I  know  of  nothing  in  connection  with  our  national 
affairs  which  stirred  me  more  in  my  early  life  than  the 
contemptuous  indifference  with  which  we  were  treated 
by  the  nations  which  considered  themselves  the  Great 
Powers  of  the  world,  "  but : 

Things  change  with  lightning-like  rapidity  in  the  world ; 
the  time  came  when  we  realized  that  we  had  out-grown 
the  clothes  of  childhood,  and  having  arrived  at  full-grown 
manhood  we  should  assume  its  duties.  With  growth  came 
strength  and  the  power  as  well  as  the  inclination  to  dis 
charge  duty.  The  world  did  not  know  this — we  did. 
While  we  had  grown  to  have  a  giant's  strength,  the  world 
still  thought  of  and  treated  us  as  but  a  weakling.  But 
opportunity  came  at  last.  The  Powers  had  overlooked  the 
fact  that  we  had  a  navy,  or,  if  they  knew  it,  thought  only 
that  our  ships  were  for  show  until  one  morning  in  1898,  as 
the  daylight  revealed  the  city  of  Manila  and  the  shores 
of  Manila  Bay,  Dewey's  guns  waked  the  world  to  a  realiza 
tion  of  the  fact  that  the  United  States  was  thenceforth  to 
be  a  power  in  the  world,  to  be  heeded  and  if  necessary  to 
be  reckoned  with.  From  that  moment  all  was  changed. 
From  that  hour  we  were  not  only  invited  to  the  family 
table  of  nations,  but  to  take  our  seat  at  the  head  of  the  table, 
and,  whether  seated  at  the  head  or  elsewhere  about  the 
board,  there  came  true  the  old  saying:  "Where  McGregor 
sits,  there  is  the  head  of  the  table."  We  have  thus  come  to 


470  Orville  H.  Platt 

our  own  at  last.     We  have  found  our  true  international 
position  and  it  has  been  fully  recognized. 

We  have  seen  how  he  approved  the  acquisition  of 
Hawaii,  and  how  he  criticised  the  Cleveland  administra 
tion  for  the  restoration  of  Queen  Lil  to  her  comic 
throne.  His  feeling  about  the  importance  of  our  rela 
tions  to  the  Sandwich  Islands  dated  back  to  the  time 
when  the  white  inhabitants  overthrew  the  native 
dynasty  and  appealed  for  annexation  to  the  United 
States.  "  I  think  I  understand  the  situation  some 
what,  "  he  wrote  in  March,  1889 : 

It  is  perfectly  evident  even  to  an  inexperienced  observer 
that  England  is  trying  to  obtain  supremacy  in  the  Sand 
wich  Islands,  France  in  Hayti,  and  Germany  in  Samoa; 
each  of  these  three  points  being  places  in  which  it  is  es 
sential  that  no  foreign  power  should  obtain  influence 
superior  to  that  of  the  United  States.  It.  does  not  require 
much  prophetic  vision  to  see  that  whatever  diplomatic 
relations  we  are  to  have  with  England  during  the  next 
four  years  will  be  complicated  with  the  Sandwich  Islands ; 
and  I  can  easily  understand  the  wish  of  Mr.  Elaine  to  have 
some  one  skilled  in  diplomacy  and  international  law  at 
the  Sandwich  Islands.  I  shall  be .  surprised  if  the  next 
four  years  does  not  develop  a  situation  which  will  call  for 
the  exercise  of  the  highest  talent  and  the  soundest  judgment 
on  the  part  of  whoever  may  be  Minister  at  that  place.1 

In  December,  1895,  President  Cleveland  stirred  the 
country  with  his  Venezuelan  message  asking  Congress 
to  authorize  a  commission  to  determine  the  true  divi 
sional  line  betwee/i  the  republic  of  Venezuela  and  Bri 
tish  Guiana.  This  challenge  to  Great  Britain,  with  its 
sturdy  Americanism  and  its  demoralizing  influence 
upon  stocks,  shocked  the  sensibilities  of  some  of  Mr. 

'  Letter  to  M.  M.  Gower,  March  26,  1889. 


A  Robust  American  471 

Cleveland's  former  idolaters,  but  it  commanded  the 
endorsement  of  many  of  his  political  adversaries. 
Mr.  Platt,  although  opposed  to  Cleveland  at  almost 
every  point  of  public  policy,  advocated  the  speediest 
possible  action  on  the  bill  carrying  the  necessary 
authorization.  He  opposed  any  amendment  of  the 
bill  which  had  already  passed  the  House : 

The  question  arises  whether  Great  Britain  is  attempting 
unfairly  to  extend  her  sovereignty  and  authority  in  Ven 
ezuela.  The  message  of  the  President  states  the  policy  of 
the  American  people  on  this  subject  very  clearly  and  very 
vigorously.  .  .  .  Any  amendment  made  in  the  Senate 
will  be  construed  in  England  as  a  hesitation  on  the  part 
of  the  Senate  to  sustain  the  President  in  the  position  he 
has  taken.  .  .  .  The  bill  now  contains  all  that  the  Presi 
dent  of  the  United  States  asks  of  us.  And  it  is  the  Presi 
dent  of  the  United  States  who  asks  this  of  Congress.  It 
is  not  as  an  individual  who  occupies  the  executive  chair 
that  he  has  addressed  us,  but  he  speaks  in  the  official 
capacity  as  the  President  of  the  country,  and  in  this  matter 
what  he  says  should  be  treated  as  the  utterance  of  the 
President  of  the  United  States. 

"  With  regard  to  Venezuela,  I  did  the  only  thing 
possible,"  he  wrote  while  the  affair  was  still  fresh 
in  the  public  mind,  "  which  was  to  favor  the  appoint 
ment  of  the  commission,  and  though  my  action  was 
not  quite  popular,  I  think  the  country  is  beginning 
to  see  that  the  commission  was  the  only  way  out  of 
the  difficulty."1 

And  on  the  heels  of  the  President's  warlike  message 
he  wrote  to  former  Congressman  John  R.  Buck  of 
Hartford : 

i  Letter  to  George  L.  Cheney,  March  14,  1895. 


472  Orville  H.  Platt 

I  got  your  letter  of  the  first  or  second  instant  and  I 
send  you  to-day  the  message  and  correspondence  between 
Olney  and  Lord  Salisbury  and  also  a  record  containing 
Mr.  Lodge's  speech.  I  hope  you  will  read  it  carefully. 
I  am  rather  surprised  to  know  that  you  could  flay  Olney, 
for  I  think  his  dispatch  to  Lord  Salisbury  is  a  pretty 
temperate  statement  of  the  case.  I  do  not  know  whether 
we  disagree  radically  or  in  non-essentials.  I  object  to 
England  or  any  other  foreign  power  getting  a  foothold 
on  the  western  continent  or,  if  already  here,  extending 
its  possessions  here.  I  think  the  United  States  ought  to 
interfere  whenever  either  is  attempted.  Do  you  hold  that 
it  is  nothing  to  the  United  States,  that  we  ought  not  to 
object  to  colonization  by  foreign  powers  or  the  unjust  and 
ruthless  extension  of  foreign  colonial  institutions  here? 
If  so,  we  disagree  radically;  if  not,  it  is  only  a  question  of 
propriety  and  of  making  our  position  known.  But  this 
is  getting  to  be  ancient  history  here  and  few  suppose  that 
in  the  Venezuelan  matter  such  a  case  of  wilful  aggression 
is  to  be  made  out  as  to  require  the  interference  of  the  United 
States  upon  the  principles  I  have  laid  down. 

Thus  believing  that  his  country  was  to  be  a  constant 
factor  in  great  world  problems ;  that  our  destiny  decreed 
our  territorial  growth;  that  the  Monroe  Doctrine  was  a 
practical,  working  theory,  he  consistently  upheld  all 
measures  needed  to  equip  us  for  the  important  part 
in  the  international  drama  which  we  were  bound  to 
play.  He  supported  appropriations  for  an  adequate 
navy,  and  sustained  the  McKinley  and  Roosevelt 
administrations  in  their  plans  for  an  efficient  army. 
He  was  not  niggardly  when  it  came  to  maintaining 
our  representatives  abroad  in  a  style  befitting  a  first- 
class  Power.  He  was  one  to  whom  every  President 
could  look  for  support  in  policies  intended  to  insure 
the  dignity  of  the  United  States  among  the  nations, 


A  Robust  American  473 

for  his  first  impulse  always  was  to  sustain  any  Executive 
engaged  in  upholding  the  American  side  of  an  inter 
national  argument.  In  the  last  days  of  the  Cleveland 
administration  an  arbitration  treaty  with  Great  Bri 
tain  was  negotiated.  He  was  for  ratifying  it,  if  a 
way  could  properly  be  found  to  do  so,  yet  he  would  not 
act  hastily;  for  there  were  questions  which  the  Senate 
as  a  part  of  the  treaty-making  power  might  well  con 
sider  with  great  care.  "  I  cannot  think  "  he  said  to  one 
who  urged  speedy  action  after  the  treaty  had  gone  to 
the  Senate,  "  that  there  are  any  political  considerations, 
speaking  in  the  sense  of  partisan  politics,  which  affect 
the  ratification  of  the  arbitration  treaty  " : 

It  is  a  great  treaty,  it  is  to  be  far-reaching  in  its  results, 
and  it  should  be  carefully  considered,  and  I  think  that  is 
the  disposition  with  which  it  has  been  received.  I  do  not 
know  of  any  opposition  to  the  principle  of  arbitration. 
There  are  some  questions  which  arise  as  to  what  subjects 
will  necessarily,  under  the  consideration  of  the  treaty,  be 
submitted  to  arbitration,  and  I  think  you  will  agree  that 
there  should  be  very  careful  examination  to  determine 
that.  So  far  as  I  am  at  present  advised,  I  don't  see  serious 
objection  to  the  form  and  language.  I  am  a  little  surprised 
at  the  ambiguity  of  some  of  the  expressions. 

Striving  with  all  his  might  to  reach  a  conclusion, 
the  righteousness  of  which  the  future  would  sustain, 
it  was  no  wonder  if  he  lost  patience  with  the  self -con 
stituted  custodians  of  the  general  welfare  who  tor 
mented  him  and  other  Senators  with  importunate 
demands  for  immediate  compliance  with  the  Executive 
will.  To  one  of  these  he  wrote : 

I  beg  to  assure  you  that  if  the  public  believes  what  you 
say  it  does  believe  with  reference  to  the  motives  of  Sena- 


474  Orville  H.  Platt 

tors  with  regard  to  the  arbitration  treaty  it,  in  my  judg 
ment,  believes  in  what  is  not  true  and  which  there  is  no 
reason  to  believe  is  true.  If  the  people  will  attribute 
improper  and  unworthy  motives  to  Senators  it  is  unfortu 
nate,  but  probably  cannot  be  helped.  The  principle  of 
arbitration  upon  which  the  treaty  is  founded  is  as  dear, 
I  think,  to  us  as  I  think  it  is  to  you.  That  there  are  serious 
difficulties  in  the  way  of  this  particular  treaty  is  not  to  be 
disguised.  I  presume  that  when  a  vote  is  reached  the  moral 
considerations  will  prevail  in  my  mind  and  lead  me  to 
vote  for  the  treaty  as  it  is,  but  I  cannot  shut  my  eyes  to 
the  fact  that  it  is  quite  possible,  and  more  than  probable, 
that  even  within  the  next  five  years,  to  which  it  is  limited, 
circumstances  might  arise  and  interests  of  the  United 
States  suffer  in  a  way  which  would  bring  more  condemna 
tion  to  us  than  we  are  now  receiving  because  we  are  not 
acting  in  haste.  Let  me  suggest  to  you  whether  it  would 
not  be  well  to  consider  that  Senators  are  quite  likely  after 
all  to  act  from  honest  motives  and  under  a  sense  of  great 
responsibility. 

One  of  the  reasons  which  made  him  pause  was  a  deep- 
seated  distrust  of  England's  intentions,  and  this  feel 
ing  he  expressed  in  a  reply  to  an  inquiry  addressed  to 
him  by  the  editors  of  the  Outlook  as  to  the  necessity 
for  the  Senate's  delay: 

Take  the  Clayton-Bulwer  treaty,  now  fifty  years  old, 
the  reasons  for  which,  owing  to  changed  conditions,  are 
practically  at  an  end,  which  Mr.  Frelinghuysen  notified  Eng 
land  we  were  no  longer  bound  to  observe,  but  which  Mr. 
Elaine  subsequently  acknowledged.  It  is  now  insisted  on, 
we  believe,  on  the  part  of  England  to  prevent  the  American 
Government  from  either  building  the  Nicaragua  Canal  or 
assisting  an  American  company  to  build  it.  The  pretences 
of  England  to  territory  as  recognized  by  that  treaty  have 
been  persistently  and  greatly  enlarged.  We  believe, 


A  Robust  American  475 

whether  rightly  or  not,  that  English  diplomacy  is  .constantly 
exerted  to  prevent  the  building  of  the  canal.  All  this  is 
done  in  a  way  very  difficult  to  detect,  and  the  evidence  of 
which  is  indirect,  the  results  furnishing  the  best  indication 
of  her  intrigue.  Now  in  a  matter  as  important  as  this  is, 
is  it  wise  to  submit  a  "  difference  "  which  England  may  claim 
to  arbitration?  Why  is  it  wise  to  submit  to  arbitration 
every  possible  claim  which  England  may  make  with  regard 
to  the  extensions  of  her  territory  in  this  hemisphere,  when 
for  more  than  fifty  years  we  have  been  denying  as  a  matter 
of  national  policy  her  right  to  make  any  extension  whatever? 
The  truth  is,  and  we  may  as  well  look  it  in  the  face,  that  Eng 
land  is  a  preposterous  claimant  everywhere  in  the  world, 
going  just  as  far  with  her  claims  for  territorial  extensions 
and  commercial  aggrandizement  as  she  dare  to  go  without 
encountering  forcible  opposition.  Her  diplomatic  his 
tory  has  been  one  of  continual  aggression,  both  in  this  coun 
try  and  everywhere  else.  Is  it  not  fair  to  suppose  that 
when  once  it  is  provided  that  all  "differences"  shall  be 
submitted  to  arbitration,  her  claims  will  be  indefinitely 
"enlarged"?  When  she  no  longer  feels  they  are  to  be  re 
sisted,  those  who  have  been  careful  students  of  her  policy 
cannot  but  anticipate  that  new  claims  very  aggravating  in 
their  character  will  be  put  forth  for  the  very  purpose  of  being 
submitted  to  arbitration  in  the  hope  that  through  her  great 
influence  and,  if  the  word  does  not  shock  you,  chicanery, 
she  may  get  some  of  her  claims  allowed.  We  have  had 
a  great  many  arbitrations  with  Great  Britain.  In  every 
instance  but  one,  that  of  the  Geneva  award,  we  have  got 
the  worst  of  it,  and  I  think  that  since  then  she  has  more 
than  wiped  out  by  arbitrations  the  advantage  that  we 
gained  by  that  award.  We  are  a  self-contained  people 
unless  the  present  or  "jingo"  sentiment  is  to  prevail. 
We  do  not  seek  extension  or  aggrandizement.  We  shall 
never  do  so  with  the  expectation  of  settling  our  claims 
by  arbitration.  All  our  knowledge  of  Great  Britain  leads 
us  to  suppose  and  to  believe  that  she  will.  We  think  that 


476  Orville  H.  Platt 

we  can  see  many  directions  in  which  the  moment  this 
treaty  is  ratified  she  will  begin  to  push  claims  which  have 
lain  comparatively  dormant  because  she  felt  that  the 
United  States  would  not  submit  to  their  being  pushed. 

If  you  have  ever  lived  in  the  country,  you  will  remember 
in  the  town  where  you  resided  some  man  who  was  over 
reaching,  known  to  be  contentious,  setting  up  preposterous 
claims  with  his  neighbors,  ready  to  assert  them  by  physical 
methods  or  by  lawsuits,  ingenious  in  insisting  upon  shadowy 
and  doubtful  rights  until  he  was  really  the  terror  of  his 
neighbors.  I  don't  think  that  the  proposition  of  such  a 
man  to  submit  all  "differences"  which  he  might  have  with 
anyone  for  five  years  to  arbitration  would  have  been  looked 
upon  with  the  utmost  favor.  The  people  who  knew  him 
would  be  very  suspicious  of  a  multiplication  of  "differ 
ences,"  especially  when  it  was  quite  doubtful  as  to  whom 
the  person  selecting  the  arbitrators  would  desire  to  favor, 
or  whether  that  person  was  far-sighted  enough  to  foresee 
any  bias  which  might  exist  in  the  minds  of  the  deciding 
arbitrator  whom  he  might  select. 

Such  suggestions  as  these  cannot  but  find  a  place  in  the 
minds  of  those  who  have  been  careful  students  and  ob 
servers  of  the  policy  pursued  by  Great  Britain.  And  having 
said  this,  I  turn  to  the  other  side  of  the  question  and  say, 
that  probably  the  benefit  established  of  the  principle  of  a 
peaceable  settlement  of  national  differences  will,  in  my 
mind,  outweigh  the  objections  which  present  themselves 
to  me  sufficiently  to  secure  my  vote  for  the  treaty  without 
amendment  unless  we  can  have  a  pretty  good  understanding 
that  some  amendments  would  be  acceded  toby  Great  Britain. 
But  it  is  not  a  question  which  should  be  met  and  decided 
in  blind  haste.  A  Senator  is  just  as  responsible  for  this 
treaty  as  the  President  is,  and  must  approach  the  question 
of  its  ratification  in  the  same  spirit  as  he  would  the  question 
of  its  negotiation  in  the  first  instance,  and  proceed  with  the 
same  deliberation.  It  is  one  of  those  questions  where  there 
ought  to  be  no  jumping  at  conclusions.  And  I  want  in 


A  Robust  American  477 

conclusion  to  say  that  I  do  not  believe  that  this  treaty  is 
being  considered  by  Senators  from  a  partisan  standpoint, 
but  just  from  the  standpoint  of  the  President  and  Mr. 
Olney  during  the  year  which  they  have  been  trying  to 
arrange  its  details  and  terms. 

To  another  correspondent1  with  whom  he  had  been 
in  frank  communication,  he  explained  in  a  little  differ 
ent  way,  the  considerations  which  influenced  him  in 
weighing  carefully  the  provisions  of  the  treaty : 

I  should  probably  let  the  benefits  to  be  derived  from  the 
ratification  of  any  treaty  outweigh  my  fears,  and  should 
have  voted  for  the  treaty  as  a  whole  without  amendment 
if  that  had  been  thought  best  by  the  Foreign  Relations 
Committee.  At  the  same  time,  we  who  know  England 
and  English  policy  cannot  help  having  fears  that  some 
interests  of  the  United  States  may  be  put  in  jeopardy  by 
the  treaty  of  arbitration,  in  a  way  and  to  an  extent  which 
would  make  those  who  are  now  most  desirous  that  it 
should  be  ratified  extremely  serious.  Even  Mr.  Edmunds, 
who  has  been  a  consistent  and  able  advocate  of  the  treaty, 
can  only  answer  those  fears  by  saying  that  the  matters  in 
which  our  interests  would  be  likely  to  be  endangered 
would  not  come  within  the  jurisdiction  of  arbitration,  and 
he  may  be  right  in  respect  to  that,  but  jurisdiction  would 
certainly  be  claimed  with  reference  to  matters  growing 
out  of  or  dependent  upon  the  Clayton-Bulwer  treaty, 
and  if  we  deny  jurisdiction  and  succeeded  in  preventing 
those  matters  from  coming  to  arbitration,  we  should  be 
put  in  the  position  of  having,  by  technical  plea,  avoided 
the  principle  of  the  treaty. 

During  the  Roosevelt  administration  the  question 
of  arbitration  again  came  before  the  Senate — first 
through  a  treaty  which  Secretary  Hay  negotiated  with 

»  Professor  Waldo  G.  Pratt  of  the  Hartford  Theological  Seminary. 


478  Orville  H.  Platt 

Great  Britain,  and  later  through  treaties  supplemental 
to  the  Hague  Convention  of  1899,  intended  to  render 
effective  the  provisions  of  that  Convention  dealing 
with  ''the  permanent  court  of  arbitration."  In  both 
instances  the  Senate  was  disposed  to  cling  to  its  pre 
rogatives  as  a  constitutional  part  of  the  treaty-making 
power.  As  for  the  treaty  with  Great  Britain, there  was 
a  serious  question  about  the  advisability  of  entering 
into  a  general  arbitration  agreement  at  a  time  when 
matters  affecting  the  Isthmian  Canal  were  likely  to 
come  up  in  which  Great  Britain  might  enter  obnoxious 
claims.  As  in  the  case  of  the  earlier  treaty  negotiated 
by  Secretary  Olney,  Mr.  Platt  was  for  going  slow. 
"  Every  time  we  come  to  a  question  of  arbitration  " 
he  wrote  in  February,  1904,  to  Lynde  Harrison  of 
New  Haven,  a  supporter  of  the  treaty,  "the  matter 
seems  to  be  one  that  we  can  not  well  arbitrate " : 

For  instance, — the  anti-Panama  people  are  now  ser 
iously  proposing  (and  it  is  about  all  there  is  left  of  the 
anti- Panama  sentiment)  that  we  should  enter  into  a  treaty 
with  Colombia  to  pay  her  some  $10,000,000  upon  the  theory 
that  she  has  a  grievance,  and  that  we  ought  to  pay  her 
for  the  sake  of  quiet  and  good  feeling.  Of  course,  this 
proposition  rests  upon  the  assumption  that  Colombia 
thinks  that  we  have  done  something  wrong.  I  would  not 
like  to  submit  to  arbitration  on  any  such  question  as  that 
at  the  present  stage  of  the  Panama  matter.  True,  it 
might  be  said  that  if  Colombia  has  no  real  claim  against 
us,  we  would  not  be  hurt  by  agreeing  that  she  might  present 
whatever  she  had  or  thought  she  had,  and  have  the  ques 
tion  arbitrated,  and  yet,  it  seems  unwise  and  unnecessary 
to  submit  a  perfectly  absurd  contention  to  arbitration.  I 
merely  speak  of  this  to  show  that  there  is  all  the  time  be 
fore  the  Senate  some  concrete  proposition  for  arbitration 
which  seems  to  be  inadmissible. 


A  Robust  American  479 

The  Hague  treaties  were  held  a  long  time  in  the 
Senate,  a  majority  there  contending  that  a  general 
treaty  could  not  properly  be  made  giving  to  the  Exe 
cutive  discretion  in  entering  into  agreements  with 
foreign  powers  regarding  certain  matters  in  dispute, 
but  that  each  separate  agreement  must  be  subject  to 
ratification  by  the  Senate.  Mr.  Platt  during  the 
session  of  1904-5  was  occupied  with  his  duties  as 
presiding  officer  of  the  Swayne  impeachment  case. 
He  was  ill  much  of  the  time  and  in  no  condition  to 
undertake  exacting  tasks,  yet  he  was  concerned  about 
the  treaties  and  anxious  if  possible  to  come  to  the  assis 
tance  of  the  administration.  When  the  question  came 
before  the  Senate  as  to  accepting  the  amendment  pro 
posed  by  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations  substi 
tuting  the  word  "treaty"  for  the  word  "agreement," 
he  voted  with  the  small  minority  against  the  amend 
ment,  but  made  no  record  of  the  reasons  for  his  vote. 
Realizing  that  the  position  of  the  administration  ought 
to  be  fully  stated,  ill  though  he  was,  he  felt  impelled 
to  prepare  himself  to  argue  the  administration's  case 
against  the  majority  of  his  associates,  and  he  dictated 
from  his  sick  bed  the  following  letter  to  Secretary  Hay 
which  he  sent  by  a  special  messenger  to  the  State 
Department  to  be  placed  in  Mr.  Hay's  own  hands : 

DEAR  MR.  SECRETARY: 

I  would  like  to  be  able  to  take  your  side  of  the  argument 
about  the  treaties,  and  am  inclined  that  way,  but  I  have  a 
little  touch  of  the  grip.  I  get  out  long  enough  to  go  up 
to  the  Senate  each  day  to  preside  at  the  impeachment 
trial,  after  which  I  come  home  and  the  rest  of  the  time 
am  in  bed. 

I  write  this  to  say  that  I  think  that  inasmuch  as  the 
Committee  on  Foreign  Relations  proposes  to  make  an 


480  Orville  H.  Platt 

argument,  according  to  the  newspapers,  sustaining  the  Com 
mittee's  side  of  the  question,  it  would  be  well  if  the  Depart 
ment  of  State  could,  in  a  way,  furnish  a  brief,  outlining 
its  views.  If  I  can  come  to  the  same  conclusion  that  the 
Department  of  State  does,  I  would  like  to  argue  it. 

Putting  the  proposition  into  concrete  form, — I  under 
stand  that  the  Department  of  State  claims  that  the  Presi 
dent,  by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Senate, 
may  make  a  treaty  binding  upon  our  Government  and  the 
Senate  alike,  to  submit  a  certain  class  of  disputes  which 
cannot  be  adjusted  by  diplomacy,  to  the  Hague  tribunal 
for  arbitration,  authorizing  the  President  to  determine 
whether  a  particular  controversy  which  may  arise  falls 
within  the  class  which,  by  the  treaty,  it  is  agreed  shall  be 
submitted  to  that  tribunal,  and  to  arrange  the  method  and 
rules  of  submission;  that  the  Senate  denies  this,  holding 
that  no  question  of  difference  can  be  submitted  even 
after  such  a  treaty  has  been  made,  except  by  a  new  treaty 
negotiated  by  the  President  and  ratified  by  the  Senate.  In 
other  words,  that  the  United  States,  by  reason  of  its 
Constitution,  can  not  enter  into  a  general  arbitration 
treaty ;  that  the  most  it  can  do  is  to  promise  that,  if  differ 
ences  arise  which  can  not  be  settled  by  diplomacy,  it  will 
endeavor  to  negotiate  a  treaty,  which,  if  ratified  by  the 
Senate,  will  permit  the  particular  difference  to  be  submitted. 

With  this  grip  cold  which  I  have,  and  all  my  other  work, 
I  cannot  go  to  the  bottom  of  this  subject,  either  argumen- 
tatively  or  on  precedent,  but  it  looks  as  if  it  is  going  to 
reach  a  point  where  I  must  take  a  position  in  the  matter, 
and  I  would  like  you  to  help  me  out  if  you  can. 

Yours  truly, 

O.  H.  PLATT. 

Honorable  JOHN  HAY, 
Secretary  of  State. 

He  seems  not  to  have  been  quite  satisfied  with  the 
pleadings  on  either  side.  With  the  Senate's  contention 


A  Robust  American  481 

he  had  little  sympathy.  He  thought  the  body  to 
which  he  belonged  was  getting  altogether  too  critical. 
"  I  would  stand  as  stoutly  as  anyone  against  any  en 
croachment  .upon  the  prerogatives  of  the  Senate,  or 
against  any  unlawful  or  unauthorized  action  by  the 
Executive, "  he  wrote  Judge  George  Gray: 

But  it  does  not  do  the  Senate  or  the  country  any  good 
to  be  continually  looking  to  see  if  in  some  unimportant 
particular  the  Executive  has  not  gone  too  far.  I  have 
known  people  so  jealous  of  their  own  rights,  and  so  fearful 
of  interference  therewith  that  they  made  their  whole  lives 
miserable,  forfeiting  the  respect  of  everyone  who  knew 
them.  I  feel  that  the  Senate  is  acting  like  such  individuals. 

At  the  same  time  he  was  unable  to  get  from  the 
administration  a  conclusive  statement  of  its  position, 
and  one  of  the  last  letters  he  ever  wrote  on  the  subject 
was  in  the  nature  of  an  argument  with  himself1 : 

I  think  that  you  understand  that  I  voted  against  the 
amendment  of  the  arbitration  treaty,  substituting  the  word 
"treaty"  for  the  word  "agreement."  I  do  not  think  that 
the  question  has  been  intelligently  stated  yet,  either  by 
the  President  or  by  the  Senate.  It  may  be  stated  in  this 
way: 

Can  the  President  by  and  with  the  advice  and  consent 
of  the  Senate,  make  a  general  arbitration  treaty  with  an 
other  power,  by  which  all  disputes  of  a  certain  class  arising 
hereafter  shall  be  referred  to  the  Hague  tribunal,  the 
President  determining  whether  the  particular  matter  aris 
ing  falls  within  the  class  contemplated  by  the  treaty,  and 
how  the  necessary  agreement  in  order  to  have  the  dispute 
properly  presented  to  the  Hague  tribunal  shall  be  made, 
as  well  as  by  whom,  or,  must  the  Senate  be  consulted  and 
take  part  in  the  submission  of  every  case  which  may  here- 

i  Letter  to  S.  E.  Chaffee,  Derby,  Connecticut,  February  21,  1905. 
31 


482  Orville  H.  Platt 

after  arise,  thus  taking  part  in  the  determination  whether 
the  case  falls  within  the  class  of  controversies  to  be  sub 
mitted  to  that  tribunal.  In  other  words,  can  the  President 
and  Senate  now,  in  the  exercise  of  the  treaty-making  power, 
provide  that  cases  which  afterwards  arise  of  a  certain  class 
or  nature,  shall  be  submitted  without  further  treaty  agree 
ment,  to  the  tribunal? 

It  is  a  close  question  which  would  require  a  long  time  for 
me  to  argue,  but  I  incline  to  the  view  that  the  President 
is  right  and  the  Senate  wrong  about  the  matter.  There  is 
no  quarrel — no  controversy.  Either  side  of  the  question 
may  be  honestly  taken,  and  is  honestly  taken.  If  the  Presi 
dent  is  right,  there  may  be  a  general  arbitration  treaty. 
If  the  Senate  is  right,  there  can  not  be,  and  every  dispute 
arising  must  be  the  subject  of  a  special  treaty.  It  all 
hinges  on  the  words  of  the  Constitution,  that  "the  Presi 
dent  may,  with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Senate, 
make  treaties." 

His  service  came  to  an  end  with  the  question  still 
pending,  but  there  can  be  no  doubt  about  what  would 
have  been  his  course. 


CHAPTER  XXXVI 

THE  PANAMA  AFFAIR 

Always  for  the  Canal — A  New  Republic  on  the  Isthmus — Defender 

of  the  Administration — Speech  of  January  20-21,  1904 — 

The  "Yale  Protest." 

NO  one  in  any  way  familiar  with  his  record  and 
character  should  have  supposed  that  when  it 
came  to  the  point  of  deciding  whether  to  build  the 
Isthmian  Canal  he  would  be  found  temporizing  or 
weaving  fanciful  objections  to  the  only  practical  method 
of  entering  on  the  work;  yet  in  the  fruitful  days  of  the 
fall  of  1903,  when  the  hour  struck  to  end  at  last  the 
years  of  weary  waiting  and  Mr.  Platt  aligned  himself 
by  President  Roosevelt's  side,  there  were  some  who 
grieved  for  him  as  for  a  lost  leader.  The  building  of 
the  canal  had  been  a  project  close  to  his  heart  for  many 
years.  Almost  his  first  official  act  in  the  Senate  had 
been  the  introduction  of  a  joint  resolution  inviting 
the  co-operation  of  the  nations  of  Europe  in  the  selec 
tion  of  a  route  for  the  transit  of  ships  across  the  Isthmus, 
and  through  all  the  intervening  years  he  had  never  let 
himself  be  lured  away  from  the  real  point  at  issue  by 
futile  discussion  as  to  whether  the  canal  should  be  built 
in  one  place  or  another.  When,  under  the  lead  of  Mark 
Hanna,  Congress  at  last  expressed  its  preference  for 
the  Panama  route,  he  gladly  gave  his  assent,  and  when 
a  little  later  President  Roosevelt,  refusing  longer  to  be 

483 


484  Orville  H.  Platt 

held  in  contempt  by  Colombia,  made  terms  with  the 
newly  created  state  of  Panama,  he  gave  the  administra 
tion  his  prompt  and  hearty  support.  It  seemed  to 
him  the  natural  and  logical  sequence  of  events  that, 
when  Colombia  undertook  to  hold  up  the  United  States 
in  exacting  an  unreasonable  price  for  its  rights  in  the 
Isthmus,  the  people  of  Panama,  who  were  most  vitally 
interested  in  the  construction  of  the  canal,  should  throw 
off  an  authority  which  had  long  been  odious  and  thus 
clear  the  way  for  beginning  the  work.  It  was  equally 
natural  that  the  United  States  should  recognize  the 
de  facto  government  thus  created.  "  I  do  not  see 
how  it  was  possible  to  do  anything  different  than  was 
done  in  the  matter  of  the  Panama  revolution"  he 
wrote  shortly  after  the  event : 

We  were  under  treaty  obligations  with  New  Granada, 
which  obligations  ran  to  Colombia  after  the  government 
of  New  Granada  was  wiped  out  by  revolution,  and  which 
of  course  now  runs  to  Panama  if  it  establishes  its  inde 
pendence,  to  keep  open  the  transit  of  the  Panama  railroad. 
Of  course  it  is  for  our  interest  to  have  this  done.  It  would 
really  be  our  duty  if  there  were  no  treaty  requiring  us  to 
do  it,  consequently  our  action  in  that  respect  can  not 
be  criticised,  I  think.  There  is  no  evidence  that  our 
Government  has  done  anything  to  encourage  a  revolution 
there — on  the  contrary,  it  is,  I  think,  susceptible  of  proof 
that  it  has  not — still,  those  who  have  been  familiar  with 
the  situation  have  felt  that  it  might  occur  and  our  Govern 
ment  has  been  watching  the  matter,  ready  to  keep  open 
the  Panama  railroad  and  protect  the  interests  of  American 
citizens  there.  There  was  a  revolution,  and  I  am  sure 
we  did  nothing  more  than  we  ought  to  have  done  when  it 
occurred.  Then,  the  provisional  government  established 
appointed  an  agent  to  represent  their  interests,  and  our 
government  received  that  agent,  stating  the  facts  and  say- 


The  Panama  Affair  485 

ing  that  it  appeared  that  there  was  a  unanimous  acquies 
cence  on  the  part  of  the  people  of  Panama  to  establish 
a  government  for  themselves.  This  was  not  a  formal 
recognition  of  the  independence  of  the  new  government 
of  Panama.  We  could  scarcely  refuse  to  listen  to  a  man 
appointed  as  the  representative  of  the  inchoate  govern 
ment.  The  question  of  whether  there  will  be  a  formal 
recognition  of  Panama  as  an  independent  government 
will  come  later,  and  if  a  government  is  established  there, 
with  a  constitution,  a  president  and  legislature  which 
seem  able  to  maintain  its  existence,  of  course  our  whole 
policy  in  such  matters  would  require  the  recognition  of 
its  independence.  All  we  have  done  now,  as  it  seems  to 
me,  is  to  recognize  the  fact  that  by  a  revolution  there  is 
a  de  facto  government  set  up  there.  Whether  the  full 
recognition  of  this  government  will  come  must  depend  upon 
the  future.  The  truth  of  the  matter  is,  I  suspect,  that 
Colombia  undertook  to  hold  up  the  United  States,  demand 
ing  more  money  for  the  concession  of  canal  rights  than  it 
should,  and  that  Panama  being  aggrieved  in  that  respect, 
desiring  the  canal  and  feeling  that  it  had  been  unjustly 
treated,  decided  to  sever  its  relations  with  the  Colombian 
Government.  Now,  I  am  informed,  the  government  of 
Colombia  expresses  its  entire  willingness  to  ratify  the 
treaty,  but  it  seems  to  be  too  late.  If  Panama  succeeds 
in  the  establishment  of  a  stable  constitutional  government, 
and  sends  a  minister  here,  I  see  no  grounds  upon  which  he 
should  be  rejected.  You  spoke  of  haste,  but  after  all, 
I  do  not  see  that  any  undue  haste  has  been  exercised. 
Revolutions  in  South  American  countries  are  hasty  affairs 
anyway,  and  where  we  have  interests  we  must  find  some 
one  to  deal  with  for  the  protection  of  those  interests.1 

Such  a  cry  as  went  up  from  the  throats  of  the  vice 
gerents  of  the  Almighty  had  not  been  heard  in  all  the 
years  since  it  was  decided  to  retain  the  Philippines. 

1  Letter  to  W.  F.  Osborne,  November  11,  1903. 


486  Orville  H.  Platt 

President  Roosevelt  was  assailed  with  a  ferocity  before 
which  a  weaker  Executive  might  have  quailed,  and 
Senator  Platt  came  in  for  his  share  of  the  vituperation. 
There  was  a  little  group  in  New  Haven  who  deplored 
his  course,  but  by  whom  owing  to  past  relations  he 
could  be  treated  only  with  respect.  Chief  among  them 
was  Rev.  Dr.  Newman  Smyth  who  early  undertook  a 
crusade  against  the  Panama  policy  of  the  administra 
tion.  He  wrote  to  Mr.  Platt  asking  for  certain  docu 
ments  with  which  to  fortify  himself  and  added : 

"  I  meet  with  little  but  an  expression  of  amazement 
and  reprobation  concerning  the  high-handed  action  of 
the  President." 

Mr.  Platt  promptly  sent  the  documents  with  the 
comment : 

"  So  far  as  I  know  here  the  President's  course  meets 
with  quite  universal  approval,"  and  later  he  wrote: 

I  may  say  that  I  do  not  agree  with  you  at  all  in  your 
views  of  the  Panama  situation.  I  think,  if  our  Government 
had  done  anything  different  from  what  it  did,  there  would 
have  been  a  storm  of  indignation  throughout  the  country 
and  justly  so. 

After  the  treaty  with  Panama  had  been  submitted  to 
the  Senate,  the  New  Haven  group  prepared  a  petition 
praying  for  its  rejection,  and  forwarded  it  to  Senator 
Hoar.  Because  the  names  of  a  few  Yale  professors 
were  signed  to  the  petition  it  was  styled  the  "Yale 
Protest,"  greatly  to  the  disgust  of  other  members  of 
the  Yale  faculty  who  were  anything  but  sympathetic 
with  the  move.  Mr.  Platt  immediately  was  flooded 
with  letters  from  New  Haven  disclaiming  the  right  of 
the  petitioners  to  speak  for  any  except  themselves. 
"In  New  Haven,"  wrote  a  prominent  physician,  "it 


ORVILLE    H.    PLATT 


The  Panama  Affair  487 

is  a  laughing  matter.  There  is  n't  a  good  Republican 
in  the  city  who  condemns  the  action  in  Panama." 
Some  wanted  him  to  ask  the  Senate  to  refuse  to  re 
ceive  the  petition.  To  these  he  replied  that  he  doubted 
whether  it  was  worth  while  for  him  to  dignify  it  by 
any  particular  notice.  To  one  he  wrote : 

Of  course  I  would  not  consider  the  New  Haven  petition 
a  matter  requiring  any  notice  on  my  part  in  the  Senate  or 
anywhere  else.  The  Democrats  in  the  Senate  are  by  no 
means  a  unit  against  the  treaty  and  the  action  of  the 
President  in  recognizing  the  new  state  of  Panama.  The 
attack  on  the  President  is  an  attempt  to  force  the  building 
of  the  canal  on  the  Nicaraguan  route,  rather  than  the 
expression  of  actual  belief  that  he  has  done  anything 
worthy  of  condemnation. 

Judge  W.  K.  Townsend,  of  the  United  States  Circuit 
Court,  a  member  of  the  Yale  faculty  of  law  was  con 
strained  to  write  him : 

I  wish  I  could  convey  to  you  some  idea  of  the  feeling 
in  this  community  and  among  the  Yale  professors  in 
regard  to  that  Panama  petition.  Professor  George  P. 
Fisher,  than  whom  no  man  here  is  more  eminent  for  learn 
ing  and  ability  called  on  me  to  deplore  the  false  position 
in  which  Yale  has  been  placed  by  this  ill-timed,  unjustified 
movement  and  the  discourtesy  to  you.  Professors  Louns- 
bury  and  Day  and  Brewer  have  expressed  themselves  very 
forcibly  on  the  subject.  .  .  .  Dr.  Fisher  agreed  to  write 
to  Secretary  Hay  and  I  agreed  to  write  to  the  President. 
But  it  has  occurred  to  me  that  as  there  may  be  some  legal 
complications  growing  out  of  the  matter  perhaps  it  is 
enough  and  better  to  say  confidentially  to  you  that  I 
with  other  Yale  professors,  several  of  whom  were  ap 
proached  and  refused  to  be  parties  to  any  such  perform 
ance,  feel  that  President  Roosevelt  and  you  ought  to 
know  that  we  have  implicit  faith  in  his  and  your  honor  and 


488  Orville  H.  Platt 

integrity  and  love  of  justice  and  in  the  wisdom  and  ability 
of  his  experienced  counselors  and  that  we  are  utterly 
opposed  to  said  movement  and  to  the  spirit  which  prompted 
it. 

As  an  offset  to  the  "Yale  Protest"  a  second  petition 
was  prepared  and  forwarded  to  Senator  Platt  praying 
for  the  ratification  of  the  treaty.  It  was  signed  by 
representative  business  men  of  New  Haven  and  by  a 
large  number  of  professors  of  Yale  University,  of  at 
least  equal  standing  with  those  whose  signatures  were 
affixed  to  the  first  paper.  The  member  of  the  faculty 
who  circulated  the  petition  among  his  associates  re 
ported  that  those  he  approached  expressed  feelings 
of  indignation  or  disgust  as  the  case  might  be  that  the 
early  petition  wras  so  conspicuously  announced  as  voic 
ing  Yale  sentiment.  To  him  the  Senator  responded: 

I  cannot  help  thinking  that  the  first  petition  stirred 
up  more  feeling  in  New  Haven  than  anywhere  else.  I 
think  it  has  fallen  pretty  flat  here.  I  am  sure  Senators 
know  quite  well  by  reputation  the  gentlemen  who  signed 
it  and  regard  them  as  professional  critics.  .  .  .  The 
opponents  of  the  President  have  lost  ground  in  the  Senate 
ever  since  their  attack  upon  him.  .  .  .  Mr.  Gorman 
has  lost  prestige  and  he  and  his  followers  have  really 
descended  now  to  the  position  of  saying  that  they  believe 
the  President  has  not  been  honest,  but  has  been  guilty  of 
duplicity  and  concealment.  They  can  make  no  headway 
upon  such  a  charge,  and  the  longer  they  persist  in  it  the 
less  support  they  will  have  in  the  country. 

He  did  not  confine  himself  to  thus  making  clear 
his  position  among  his  correspondents  at  home.  On 
January  20,  1904,  he  began  a  speech  in  the  Senate 
in  support  of  the  administration  which  occupied  a  part 


The  Panama  Affair  489 

of  two  days  in  delivery  and  which  was  a  comprehensive 
defence  of  all  that  had  been  done. 

The  debate  turned  not  upon  the  ratification  of  the 
treaty  with  Panama,  but  upon  a  resolution  introduced 
by  Mr.  Gorman,  ''calling  upon  the  President  for  certain 
information  touching  former  negotiations  of  the  United 
States  with  the  government  of  New  Granada  or  Colom 
bia,  "  thus  throwing  into  the  open  Senate  arguments 
which  otherwise  must  have  been  consigned  to  the  quasi- 
secretiveness  of  executive  sessions.  Mr.  Platt  gave 
his  unqualified  approval  to  every  act  of  the  President 
in  connection  with  the  Panama  affair.  He  denounced 
the  course  of  the  Democratic  minority  in  assailing  the 
President's  honesty  and  good  faith.  He  called  atten 
tion  to  the  fact,  almost  overlooked  in  the  discussion, 
that  a  new  nation  had  been  established  as  capable  of 
dealing  with  the  other  nations  of  the  world  as  Great 
Britain,  Germany,  France,  or  Russia.  If  we  had 
violated  the  principles  of  international  law  in  the  re 
cognition  of  that  state,  and  thereby  assisted  it  to  take 
its  place  among  the  nations  of  the  world,  then  at  least 
twenty  other  governments  of  the  world  had  violated 
all  the  canons  of  international  law: 

It  is  a  fact  that  the  state  called  the  "  Republic  of  Panama" 
exists,  and  that  we  can  enter  into  relations  with  it  and  it 
can  enter  into  relations  with  us,  and  that  nothing  can  change 
that  fact  or  deprive  that  state  of  the  power  to  enter  into 
relations  with  us,  or  us  to  enter  into  relations  with  it 
except  force,  war,  conquest. 

That  state  had  negotiated  with  the  United  States  a 
treaty  giving  to  the  United  States  the  right  to  con 
struct  a  canal  across  its  territory,  and  the  ratification 
of  that  treaty  without  amendment  would  be  the  end 


490  Orville  H.  Platt 

of  the  long  weary  controversy  for  the  building  of  a 
canal. 

He  asked  those  who  were  opposed  to  the  treaty 
what  they  were  going  to  do  with  this  fact  and  this 
condition : 

Will  they  vote  against  the  ratification  of  the  treaty 
because  they  think  perhaps  there  was  haste  in  its  nego 
tiation;  because,  against  the  word  of  the  President  of  the 
United  States  they  still  think  that  in  some  way  or  other 
the  President  was  in  complicity  with  the  revolution  which 
created  the  state  of  Panama,  ...  or  for  any  of  the  other 
reasons  which  have  been  discussed  here?  Will  they  vote 
against  the  treaty  except  for  the  very  reason  avowed  by  the 
Senator  from  Colorado  (Mr.  Patterson)  that  he  proposes 
to  prevent  if  possible,  the  building  of  this  canal  across 
the  Isthmus  of  Panama,  so  that  it  may  be  built  across 
Nicaragua  ? 

He  denied  that  this  Government  had  committed  any 
act  of  war  or  had  intervened  as  between  Colombia  and 
Panama.  If  it  were  not  for  the  supposed  necessities 
of  political  parties  the  claim  would  never  have  been 
made  that  this  country  had  no  right  to  protect  the 
lives  and  property  of  American  citizens  on  the  Isthmus 
of  Darien  and  to  keep  open  the  connection  by  rail  over 
the  Isthmus  from  ocean  to  ocean : 

I  claim  that  we  had  that  right  independent  of  any 
treaty.  Much  more  did  we  have  it  with  a  treaty,  the 
Treaty  of  1846.  Further  than  that  I  claim  if  the  treaty 
had  not  confirmed  us  in  this  right,  we  would  have  had  that 
right  under  the  conditions  existing  outside  the  treaty 
which  have  arisen  with  reference  to  inter-communication 
between  the  oceans  across  that  Isthmus. 

We  knew,  as  everybody  knew,  that  there  was  to  be 
a  revolution,  and  having  had  experience  we  knew  more 


The  Panama  Affair  491 

— what  revolutions  on  the  Isthmus  of  Panama  were — 
that  they  meant  fighting  without  the  observance  of 
the  rules  of  civilized  war,  that  it  meant  death  to  Ameri 
cans,  that  it  meant  the  destruction  of  American  pro 
perty,  that  it  meant  the  shutting  up  of  the  passageway 
over  the  Isthmus  between  the  oceans : 

I  say  primarily,  without  any  treaty  and  without  any 
question  of  a  canal,  this  Government  was  justified  in  sending 
a  naval  force  there  to  protect  our  interests,  and  more  than 
that  to  protect  the  interests  of  the  whole  world  in  that 
transit.  It  would  have  been  recreant  to  its  duty  if  it 
had  not  done  it,  and  the  outcry  we  now  hear  against  the 
Government  for  having  done  it  would  be  but  an  evening 
zephyr  compared  with  the  cyclone  of  denunciation  that 
we  would  have  heard  from  the  other  side  of  the  chamber 
if  it  had  not  been  done. 

Except  for  the  political  necessities  of  the  case  the 
question  never  would  have  been  raised.  In  former 
years  the  action  of  our  marines  on  the  Isthmus  had 
prevented  the  people  of  Panama  from  accomplishing 
their  independence : 

If  as  an  incident,  they  were  now  enabled  to  secure  their 
independence  because  we  would  not  permit  that  transit 
to  be  interrupted,  that  was  their  good  fortune,  as  it  was 
the  good  fortune  of  Colombia  that  in  previous  years  while 
protecting  the  Isthmus  we  had  prevented  the  Panamanians 
from  accomplishing  their  independence. 

To  those  who  were  shocked  by  what  they  called  the 
violation  of  the  principles  of  international  law,  he 
directed  the  query :  * '  How  are  the  principles  and  canons 
of  international  law  laid  down  ?"  and  he  answered  his 
own  question : 


492  Orville  H.  Platt 

By  the  concensus  of  the  powers  of  the  world  as  to  what 
is  just  and  right  and  honorable  as  between  nations,  as  the 
statute  law  determines  what  is  just  and  right  and  honorable 
between  individuals. 

After  eighteen  or  twenty  nations  had  looked  into 
the  case  and  in  recognizing  the  new  republic  of  Panama 
had  said  such  recognition  was  justifiable,  right  and 
moral,  it  did  not  lie  in  the  mouths  of  Senators  to  say 
that  any  principle  of  international  law  had  been  vio 
lated.  "  If  there  was  no  precedent  for  it  before,  that 
precedent  has  now  been  written  into  the  international 
law  of  the  world ' ' : 

It  was  a  great  act,  Mr.  President.  It  was  an  act  which, 
for  all  time  to  come,  must  affect,  and  affect,  I  believe, 
most  beneficially,  the  United  States  of  America.  The 
President  was  equal  to  the  occasion.  Brave  and  fearless 
as  he  is,  but  neither  rash  nor  impetuous,  he  did  the  right 
thing  at  the  right  time;  the  thing  which  will  insure  the 
building  of  that  canal,  so  long  delayed;  the  thing  which 
will  contribute  to  the  future  prosperity  of  this  country. 

Mr.  President,  no  great  executive  act  of  any  President 
which  contributed  to  the  growth  and  glory  of  this  country 
has  ever  been  performed  without  a  violent,  vicious,  vi 
tuperative  attack  upon  the  President  who  performed  it. 
From  the  days  of  George  Washington  to  the  days  of 
Theodore  Roosevelt,  whenever  any  President  has  had  the 
courage  to  do  what  he  ought  to  do  in  reference  to  foreign 
countries  he  has  been  assailed  as  the  present  Executive 
is  assailed.  The  Jay  treaty,  the  Louisiana  purchase,  the 
Florida  purchase  or  settlement,  the  acquisition  of  the 
Philippines,  all  have  called  down  upon  the  heads  of 
the  Presidents  who  have  taken  the  responsibility  and  done 
those  great  acts  the  coarsest  calumny,  the  most  unsparing 
vituperation. 

But,  Mr.  President,  as  time  goes  on  and  the  benefits  of 


The  Panama  Affair  493 

the  act  are  discovered  criticism  fades  away;  the  abuse  is 
forgotten  except  as  it  is  regretted;  the  act  stands  out  to 
the  glory  of  the  President  who  performed  it. 

Mr.  President,  the  hope  of  the  nations,  the  dream  of  the 
ages,  is  about  to  be  realized.  We  will  ratify  this  treaty; 
we  will  build  the  canal;  and  when  the  ships  of  the  whole 
earth,  with  their  great  cargoes,  are  passing  through  it, 
these  criticisms,  these  attacks,  these  vituperations  will  be 
forgotten;  and  whatever  President  Roosevelt  has  done 
during  this  administration  or  may  do  in  any  future  one, 
this  act  of  his  will  stand  forth  before  the  world  as  the  great 
est  act  of  his  administration,  the  act  which  has  conferred 
more  benefit  upon  the  United  States  and  the  world  than 
any  other  act  which  he  could  be  called  upon  to  perform. 

The  response  from  home  to  this  appeal  was  generous 
and  inspiring.  "  In  these  times  of  great  and  difficult 
national  questions,"  wrote  a  Yale  professor, "  it  isneces- 
sary  that  there  should  be  steady  and  clear  heads  in 
Congress  and  it  is  good  to  think  that  there  are  such, " 
and  similar  expressions  came  from  the  leading  men  of 
the  State,  Democrats  among  the  number.  When  Hoar 
presented  the  misnamed  "  Yale  Protest, "  Platt  fol 
lowed  immediately  with  the  New  Haven  petition  as  a 
response.1  The  treaty  was  ratified,  and  the  great  work 
of  canal  construction  was  ready  to  begin. 

»  Mr.  Platt's  personal  relations  with  the  Yale  Faculty  were  al 
ways  cordial.  In  1887  the  University  conferred  upon  him  the  de 
gree  of  LL.D.  At  the  Two  Hundredth  Anniversary  Celebration  in 
October,  1901,  when  he  was  an  honored  guest  with  President  Roose 
velt,  Governor  McLean,  Marquise  Ito,  and  scholars  representing 
American  and  European  institutions  of  learning,  he  made  a  force 
ful  address  commending  Yale's  earnest  purpose,  noble  aspiration, 
and  intense  energy. 


CHAPTER  XXXVII 

RELATIONS  WITH  THE  WHITE  HOUSE 

Dealings  with  Many  Administrations — The  River  and  Harbor  Bill — 

Marshall  Jewell  and  Garfield — Hawley's  Candidacy  in  1884 — 

A  Critic  of  Cleveland — Supporter  of  Harrison. 

WITH  seven  Presidents — Hayes,  Garfield,  Arthur, 
Cleveland,  Harrison,  McKinley, and  Roosevelt — 
Mr.  Platt  as  a  Senator  was  associated  during  his  long 
stay  in  Washington.  With  some  his  relations  were 
casual,  with  one  at  least  anything  but  friendly,  with 
others  confidential.  When  he  entered  the  Senate, 
Hayes  was  the  occupant  of  the  White  House, — a  well 
intentioned  Executive,  whose  administration  was  always 
under  the  shadow  of  a  disputed  election,  and  who  lacked 
the  personal  prestige  and  force  to  gather  about  him  the 
real  leaders  of  his  party  in  Congress.  Hayes  committed 
the  fatal  blunder  of  inviting  to  his  official  council  men 
without  political  influence  either  nationally  or  in  their 
home  communities.  He  even  went  so  far  in  two  in 
stances  as  to  find  Cabinet  material  in  men  whose  af 
filiations  had  not  been  with  the  party  to  which  he  owed 
his  political  advancement  and  to  which  he  must  look 
for  future  support.  His  Cabinet  contained  eminent 
men,  but  only  one  of  them,  John  Sherman,  had  a 
record  for  distinguished  party  service  in  legislation, 
or  could  negotiate  with  Congress  on  terms  of  mutual 
understanding. 

494 


Relations  with  the  White  House      495 

The  Connecticut  Senator,  new  in  national  service, 
had  few  dealings  with  the  administration  save  those 
which  were  unavoidable  in  caring  for  the  interests  of 
his  State. 

During  the  brief  season  of  Garfield's  active  incum 
bency,  he  seems  to  have  been  more  frequently  at  the 
White  House — not  on  errands  of  his  own  choosing, 
but  in  a  friendly  service  for  those  constituents  whose 
eyes  were  turned  in  that  direction  for  recognition. 
He  was  never  a  seeker  for  patronage,  and  the  necessities 
of  office-hunting  were  distasteful  to  him,  but  he  did  not 
shirk  the  duties  which  the  Republicans  of  Connecticut 
imposed  upon  him.  One  mission  in  particular  he 
undertook  involving  tact  and  discretion.  Marshall 
Jewell,  Platt's  rival  in  the  famous  midnight  caucus  of 
1879,  had  been  Chairman  of  the  Republican  National 
Committee,  which  conducted  the  campaign  resulting 
in  Garfield's  election.  He,  not  unnaturally,  expected  to 
share  in  the  prestige  of  Garfield's  success,  for  in  those 
days,  service  at  the  head  of  the  National  Committee 
was  rendered  gratuitously  by  recognized  party  leaders, 
without  intimation  of  other  than  political  reward. 
But  after  the  manner  of  politics,  he  was  a  victim  of 
presidential  forgetfulness,  and  with  the  counting  of  the 
ballots  his  services  were  no  longer  needed.  He  wanted 
a  place  in  the  Cabinet,  but  the  selection  of  Mr.  Elaine 
as  Secretary  of  State  barred  the  door  to  other  New 
England  men.  He  would  have  found  consolation 
in  the  offer  of  an  ambassadorship  which  he  might  have 
declined;  but  this  salve  to  his  wounded  pride  was  not 
forthcoming.  He  was  not  even  asked  into  the  councils 
of  the  administration  in  minor  affairs.  In  his  chagrin 
he  turned  to  Mr.  Platt  for  comfort.  It  was  the 
Senator's  thankless  task  to  act  as  messenger  between 


496  Orville  H.  Platt 

the  discomfited  Chairman  and  the  White  House,  in  a 
futile  endeavor  to  bring  about  a  better  understanding 
without  conveying  the  suggestion  that  Jewell  felt  him 
self  aggrieved.  Garfield's  assassination  came  before 
the  injustice  could  be  remedied,  and  a  little  later  Jewell 
was  beyond  the  need  of  sympathy  or  aid.  When 
Jewell  died,  Platt  was  asked  to  take  his  place  as  the 
Connecticut  member  of  the  National  Committee  but 
he  declined. 

With  Garfield's  successor,  he  was  on  friendly  but 
not  intimate  terms.  By  that  time  he  had  a  position 
in  the  Senate  which  made  it  worth  while  for  an  ad 
ministration  to  treat  him  with  respect,  but  he  confined 
his  '  dealings  with  the  White  House  to  those  matters 
which  developed  naturally  from  his  official  position. 
He  stood  behind  President  Arthur  in  two  important 
crises.  He  spoke  and  voted  against  the  Chinese  Exclu 
sion  bill  which  Arthur  vetoed,  and  he  opposed  at  every 
stage  the  River  and  Harbor  Bill  of  1882,  which,  not 
withstanding  the  President's  veto,  became  a  law.  It 
is  a  little  hard  in  these  days  of  large  expenditure  to 
understand  the  uproar  over  a  River  and  Harbor  bill 
carrying  an  appropriation  of  less  than  $19,000,000, 
but  popular  feeling,  which  had  condemned  the  bill 
while  it  was  under  consideration  in  the  House,  was 
fanned  into  indignation  by  its  passage  in  the  Senate, 
and  flamed  into  fury  on  its  enactment  over  the  Presi 
dent's  veto,  contributing  in  large  measure  to  the  over 
throw  of  the  Republican  majority  in  the  House  at  the 
elections  which  came  a  few  weeks  later.  Mr.  Platt 
was  one  of  twenty-three  Senators  who  voted  against 
the  bill  on  its  original  passage,  and  one  of  the  sixteen 
who  voted  to  sustain  the  veto. 

With  all  his  respect  for  President  Arthur,  he  could 


Relations  with  the  White  House       497 

not  support  him  for  nomination  in  1884.  Connecticut 
in  that  year  had  a  candidate  of  her  own  in  General 
Hawley,  toward  whom  there  was  considerable  friendly 
sentiment  throughout  the  country,  but  who  with  other 
candidates  was  badly  handicapped  by  the  extraordinary 
popularity  of  James  G.  Blaine.  Mr.  Platt  was  never 
a  delegate  to  a  national  convention,  nor  was  General 
Hawley  after  his  election  to  the  Senate.  Neither 
would  allow  his  name  to  be  used  for  the  place.  On 
this  occasion,  however,  Platt  went  to  Chicago  with  a 
few  other  Connecticut  Republicans  to  do  what  he  could 
for  his  colleague.  He  was  in  constant  communication 
with  Hawley  who  remained  in  Washington  and  who 
received  thirteen  votes  on  the  first  ballot,  including 
the  twelve  votes  of  the  Connecticut  delegation.  Al 
though  he  would  have  preferred  another  candidate 
than  Blaine,  he  did  what  he  could  for  Elaine's  election 
in  the  campaign  which  resulted  in  Democratic  majori 
ties  in  Connecticut,  as  throughout  the  country,  and 
he  was  keenly  disappointed  in  the  result.  He  was  too 
strong  a  party  man  to  reconcile  himself  easily  to  any 
Democratic  administration,  and  mingled  with  his 
natural  partisan  prejudice  was  a  feeling  of  personal 
distrust  of  the  new  President,  which  seems  to  have  been 
aggravated  by  the  swelling  chorus  of  independent  and 
mugwump  adulation.  With  him  the  Republican  creed 
was  a  religion  and  he  had  little  in  common  with  the 
New  Haven  group  who  were  soon  busily  engaged  in 
burning  incense  at  the  Cleveland  shrine.  There  does 
not  seem  to  have  been  an  important  act  of  the  first 
Cleveland  administration  with  which  he  was  at  all 
in  accord.  As  a  former  Chairman  of  the  Pensions  Com 
mittee,  familiar  with  its  proceedings,  he  was  quickly 
brought  into  antagonism  to  the  new  President  through 
32 


498  Orville  H.  Platt 

the  extraordinary  succession  of  pension  vetoes,  the 
spirit  of  which  angered  him,  and  the  flippant  tone 
of  which  offended  him.  He  prepared  an  exhaustive 
speech  on  this  subject  which  he  delivered  on  August  3, 
1886,  when  one  of  the  pension  vetoes  was  under  con 
sideration.  He  took  the  ground  that  there  must  in 
the  nature  of  the  case  be  a  moral  and  equitable  limita 
tion  upon  the  exercise  of  the  veto  power,  and  that 
the  President  who  conceived  that  he  should  veto  every 
bill  which  as  a  member  of  the  Senate  or  the  House 
he  would  feel  called  upon  to  vote  against,  had  mistaken 
entirely  the  purpose  of  the  veto,  and  the  circumstances 
under  which  it  should  be  exercised : 

If  it  be  established  that  the  President  can  prevent 
legislation  by  vetoing  any  and  every  bill  which  is  passed 
by  the  two  houses,  having  at  his  back  a  portion  of  one  third 
of  each  House,  then  the  day  of  majority  rule  in  this  Govern 
ment  is  over. 

As  with  the  pension  vetoes,  so  with  the  tariff  reform 
message,  with  the  hair-trigger  Chinese  exclusion  legis 
lation  of  1888,  with  the  removal  from  office  of  so-called 
"  offensive  partisans, "  with  the  President's  contempt 
for  Congress, — Mr.  Platt  was  completely  out  of  sym 
pathy,  and  his  unfriendly  attitude  during  the  first 
administration  he  carried  over  to  the  second.  He 
disapproved  especially  Cleveland's  course  in  the  cam 
paign  of  1892,  when,  with  the  acquiescence  of  the 
candidate,  fusion  was  effected  between  the  Populists 
of  the  West  and  the  money  interests  of  the  East ;  and 
he  regarded  as  incendiary,  inciting  to  anarchy  and 
unrest,  Cleveland's  utterances  at  the  time  of  the  Home 
stead  riots.  He  made  up  his  mind  before  the  inaugu 
ration  that  he  would  not  be  beholden  to  the  new 


Relations  with  the  White  House      499 

administration  for  any  favors.     To  a  postmaster  who 
wanted  reappointment  he  wrote : 

As  I  have  thought  the  matter  over  regarding  appoint 
ments  under  Mr.  Cleveland,  my  feeling  has  been  that  I 
would  not  ask  him  for  anything,  or  make  any  recommenda 
tions.  I  do  not  believe  in  him  at  all.  I  want  to  be  free 
to  express  my  mind  about  him  and  his  party,  and  I  do  not 
wish  to  be  under  obligations  to  him  or  his  party.  .  .  .  He 
is  going  to  be  a  Democratic  President  from  his  stand 
point.  He  will  probably  get  a  great  many  Democrats  of 
the  country  down  on  him,  but  at  the  same  time,  he  is  a 
Democrat,  and  to  my  mind,  the  worst  and  the  most  dan 
gerous  Democrat  in  the  country,  and  I  am  a  Republican  all 
over. 

The  restoration  of  Queen  Liliuokalani  to  the  throne 
of  Hawaii  offended  his  patriotism  and  his  good  sense; 
the  repeal  of  the  Sherman  law  he  regarded  as  a  subter 
fuge  to  divert  attention  from  the  real  cause  of  business 
depression,  and  like  some  other  Republican  Senators 
he  voted  for  it  only  under  stress  of  circumstances. 
On  the  whole,  he  was  as  much  out  of  touch  with  the 
second  Cleveland  administration  as  with  the  first, 
and  yet  on  two  notable  occasions  he  gave  it  genuine 
and  whole-hearted  support.  In  the  matter  of  the 
Venezuelan  message  the  President  had  no  more  staunch 
defender  and  when  in  July,  1894,  Cleveland  ordered 
federal  troops  to  maintain  the  transportation  of  mails 
during  the  Debs  riots  at  Chicago,  Mr.  Platt  was  one 
of  the  stoutest  advocates  of  a  resolution  endorsing  the 
action  of  the  Executive.  When  it  was  proposed  to 
add  to  the  endorsement  an  approval  of  voluntary 
arbitration  in  labor  disputes,  he  vigorously  opposed 
the  amendment : 


5oo  Orville  H.  Platt 

We  are  confronted  with  one  supreme  question  and  that 
is,  who  is  President  of  the  United  States,  and  whether  we 
have  any  United  States.  The  question  is  whether  the  per 
son  whom  we  elected  is  the  Chief  Executive  of  the  United 
States  or  whether  a  man  who  calls  himself  "President 
Debs"  is  the  President  and  Chief  Executive  of  the  United 
States.  Any  other  question  injected  into  this  discussion 
seems  to  me  entirely  out  of  place.  The  Senate  should 
express  its  approval  of  what  its  lawfully  elected  President 
has  done,  and  our  views  about  arbitration  and  all  those 
matters  can  be  discussed  hereafter.  They  are  in  the  form 
of  law.  I  object  to  anything  except  the  straight,  square, 
manly  endorsement  of  what  President  Cleveland  has  done, 
and  I  shall  vote  against  anything  else. 

That  this  course  both  in  the  Debs  affair  and  in  the 
Venezuelan  crisis  was  actuated  purely  by  patriotic 
considerations  appears  in  the  sequel.  We  find  him 
writing  a  little  later  to  a  Hartford  clergyman : 

For  Heaven's  sake,  don't  turn  to  Cleveland.  If  you  are 
thinking  of  that,  I  'm  sure  that  you  don't  know  him. 
Though  he  happens  to  stand  right  on  the  money  question 
and  possibly  on  Cuba,  he  is  so  utterly  wrong  on  most 
questions  that  I  can  scarcely  think  of  a  greater  calamity 
than  his  re-election. 

While  Benjamin  Harrison  was  in  the  Senate  he 
served  for  a  time  as  Chairman  of  the  Committee  on 
Territories,  of  which  Mr.  Platt  was  the  second  member, 
and  when  he  retired  he  was  succeeded  in  the  chairman 
ship  by  the  Connecticut  Senator.  The  two  men, 
not  altogether  unlike  in  mental  habit,  entertained 
for  each  other  a  mutual  respect.  The  Connecticut 
delegation  to  the  National  Convention  of  1888  did  not 
give  Harrison  a  single  vote  until  the  decisive  ballot; 


Relations  with  the  White  House       501 

but  when  Harrison  came  to  be  nominated  at  Chicago 
he  wrote  to  Platt  rather  playfully,  "Our  association 
was  so  friendly  in  the  Senate  that  I  felt  sure  that  you 
would  at  least  accept  my  nomination  with  resigna 
tion,"  and  after  the  election  he  replied  to  a  note  of 
congratulation,  in  a  tone  of  familiarity: 

I  did  not  need  to  be  assured  that  you  rejoiced  over  the 
result,  and  felt  some  personal  satisfaction  in  my  success. 
I  wish  I  could  have  gone  to  the  Adirondacks  or  to  the 
heart  of  some  other  wilderness  region  for  the  month  after 
the  election.  I  notice  your  suggestion  that  I  shall  follow 
my  own  head.  Perhaps  I  may  put  you  to  the  test  in  some 
special  matter  that  you  will  be  urging  upon  my  attention, 
and  I  beg  now  to  warn  you  that  this  letter  of  yours  will 
be  on  file ! 

The  personal  relations  thus  pleasantly  indicated 
continued  throughout  President  Harrison's  stay  in 
the  White  House,  and  for  the  four  years  of  his  term 
Mr.  Platt  was  one  of  the  bulwarks  of  the  administration 
in  the  Senate,  but  he  doubted  the  expediency  of  Harri 
son's  renomination  in  1892,  and  was  inclined  rather 
to  the  selection  of  some  other  western  man,  like 
Allison,  Rusk,  or  McKinley.  The  result  justified  his 
doubts. 


CHAPTER  XXXVIII 

MCKINLEY  AND  HANNA 

Mr.  Platt's   Course  in    1896 — Later   a   Friend  of    McKinley    and 
Hanna — Hawley  for  the  Cabinet. 

MR.  PL  ATT  took  little  part  in  the  pre-convention 
politics  of  1896.  His  personal  inclination  was 
toward  Speaker  Reed,  and  his  closest  friends  in  Con 
necticut  were  earnest  supporters  of  the  Maine  candidate ; 
but  following  his  usual  custom,  he  did  nothing  to  in 
fluence  the  choice  of  delegates.  With  Mr.  McKinley 's 
personal  qualities  he  was  less  familiar  and  he  was  not 
in  sympathy  with  some  of  the  methods  employed  to 
bring  about  his  nomination,  but  it  became  evident  that 
McKinley  was  to  be  nominated  and  Mr.  Platt  was  for 
harmony.  There  was  a  great  deal  of  criticism  in  eastern 
newspapers  of  McKinley 's  attitude  on  the  silver  ques 
tion,  and  some  Republican  editors  even  went  to  the 
point  of  attacking  his  record  almost  up  to  the  day  of 
the  Convention.  To  one  editor  who  wrote  him  asking 
advice  as  to  the  course  he  should  pursue,  Mr.  Platt  sent 
the  following  frank  reply : 

You  ask  a  question  which  is  hard  to  answer.  I  think  if 
I  were  running  a  newspaper  I  should  go  a  little  slow. 
If  we  must  take  McKinley  as  a  candidate,  we  do  not  want 
to  furnish  the  opposition  with  ammunition  to  be  used 
against  us  in  the  campaign,  do  we?  There  is  a  very  de 
cided  feeling  among  business  and  financial  men,  I  may  say 

502 


McKinley  and  Hanna  503 

among  all  classes,  who  believe  in  an  unequivocal  declara 
tion  against  free  trade  or  anything  like  it,  that  McKinley 
ought  to  define  his  position  on  the  money  question  at  this 
juncture  more  satisfactorily,  while  his  special  friends  and 
advocates  say  that  he  has  never  in  his  public  utterances 
failed  to  state  his  position  in  a  way  that  ought  to  be  en 
tirely  satisfactory.  The  platform  of  the  Convention  is 
manifestly  to  be  strong  enough  and  sound  enough  to 
satisfy  eastern  sentiment.  Now  suppose  it  turns  out  that 
McKinley  is  nominated  and  accepts  upon  such  a  platform ; 
would  it  be  good  policy  to  have  things  said  now  in  our  news 
papers  which  would  be  thrown  in  our  faces  all  through  the 
campaign?  It  seems  to  me  that  I  should  wait  a  while, 
at  least.  Just  now  people  in  Washington  are  worried  more 
over  the  attitude  in  which  he  is  left  by  the  action  of  the 
A.  P.  A.  council  in  Washington  than  they  are  by  doubts 
as  to  where  he  stands  on  the  money  question.  That  he 
received  a  delegation  sent  from  Washington  by  the  council, 
and  communicated  with  them  in  private,  so  to  speak,  seems 
to  be  admitted.  I  think  that  was  a  mistake.  If  he  re 
ceived  such  a  committee  at  all  it  ought  to  have  been  in 
public,  or  at  least  with  witnesses,  and  every  word  that 
he  said  made  public.  The  committee  came  back  to  Wash 
ington  and  as  a  result  the  council  action  was  that  the  atti 
tude  of  McKinley  was  satisfactory  to  the  council.  Then 
after  a  good  many  delegates  had  left,  another  action  was 
taken  by  the  "tailers"  setting  up  that  he  had  denied  in  an 
interview  his  reception  of  the  committee,  and  denouncing 
him.  Cardinal  Gibbons  thereupon  comes  out  with  a  letter 
which,  read  between  the  lines,  is  supposed  to  indicate  that 
he  cannot  get  a  Catholic  vote  if  nominated,  and  that  his 
nomination  is  to  turn  the  whole  campaign  into  a  religious 
warfare.  This  condition  and  attitude  is  causing  very 
serious  questioning  in  the  minds  of  thoughtful  men.  .  .  . 

During  the  time  that  the  delegates  were  being  appointed 
there  was  a  tremendous  rush  to  McKinley,  which  seemed 
almost  unaccountable.  It  looked  as  if  the  same  rush  would 


504  Orville  H.  Platt 

continue  up  to  the  time  of  voting  and  that  he  was  not  only 
to  be  nominated,  but  elected  by  unprecedented  majorities. 
But  since  the  delegates  have  all  been  elected  there  are 
symptoms  of  a  reaction,  the  most  prominent  symptoms 
being  those  which  I  have  indicated:  First,  the  uneasi 
ness  as  to  his  money  views;  second,  the  uneasiness  over 
this  A.  P.  A.  situation,  which  may  all  be  expressed  in  the 
almost  unspoken  sentiment  that  he  is  trying  to  ride  two 
horses.  But  in  view  of  the  fact  that,  if  nominated,  we  do 
not  want  our  own  guns  turned  upon  us  through  the  cam 
paign,  it  seems  to  me  that  if  I  were  publishing  a  newspaper 
I  would  wait. 

The  campaign  had  not  been  long  in  progress  before 
Mr.  Platt  was  ready  to  acknowledge  the  peculiar 
strength  of  McKinley  as  a  candidate.  Early  in  Novem 
ber  he  wrote  to  the  President-elect : 

I  have  said  many  times  during  this  campaign  that  I  re 
garded  your  nomination  as  providential.  I  doubt  if 
another  man  of  those  who  were  talked  about  could  have 
been  elected.  Although  rejoicing  in  the  hour  of  victory, 
we  cannot  fail  to  see  that  the  future  is  full  of  problems 
difficult  of  solution,  and  that  you  will  need  the  united  and 
unanimous  support — especially  of  the  Republican  Senators. 
I  want  here  and  now  to  express  my  desire  that  there  may 
be  the  fullest  accord  between  yourself  and  them  upon  the 
great  measures  which  must  be  considered  and  acted  upon, 
and  to  assure  you  that  if  re-elected  I  shall  do  all  in  my 
power  to  promote  it. 

When  President  McKinley  came  to  frame  his  Cabinet 
he  first  asked  Nelson  Dingley  to  be  Secretary  of  the 
Treasury,  but  Mr.  Dingley  declined.  This  left  the 
New  England  representation  in  doubt,  .and  Mr.  Platt, 
recalling  that  no  Connecticut  man  had  occupied  a  seat 
in  the  Cabinet  since  Gideon  Welles,  bethought  himself 


McKinley  and  Hanna  505 

of  bringing  about  the  selection  of  General  Hawley  as 
Secretary  of  War.  He  said  nothing  about  it  to  his 
colleague,  but  early  in  January  he  wrote  to  a  mutual 
friend,  John  R.  Buck,  of  Hartford : 

I  want  to  write  you  in  absolute  confidence.  Do  you 
think  it  would  be  a  good  thing  to  try  to  get  General  Haw- 
ley  into  the  Cabinet  ?  Now,  this  is  the  first  intimation  I 
have  made  in  this  direction  to  anyone  and  I  shall  not 
say  any  word  about  it  until  I  get  a  letter  from  you.  The 
reason  I  write  you  is  that  as  the  matter  now  stands  I  do 
not  believe  there  is  any  man  from  New  England  who  is 
likely  to  go  into  the  Cabinet.  The  supposition  that  Ding- 
ley  was  going  there  has  kept  out  all  other  candidates 
except  Boutelle,  but  I  do  not  believe  that  there  is  any 
chance  for  him.  I  myself  think,  without  being  able  to 
speak  with  authority,  that  Mr.  Dingley  is  not  going  into 
the  Cabinet  and  I  do  not  see  where  the  New  England  man 
is  coming  from.  Massachusetts  has  no  candidate,  neither 
has  Vermont  or  Rhode  Island.  Governor  Bussie1  is  talked 
of.  I  think  that  if  it  were  best  to  urge  the  matter  and 
was  agreeable  to  General  Hawley,  he  might  have  a  very 
good  chance  to  go  into  the  Cabinet. 

The  response  to  this  letter  was  not  encouraging,  and 
Mr.  Platt  telegraphed  to  Senator  Proctor  who  had  gone 
to  Cleveland  at  Mr.  Hanna 's  request,  to  talk  over  the 
selection  of  a  New  England  member  of  the  Cabinet,  that 
General  Hawley 's  Connecticut  friends  thought  it  un 
wise  to  make  any  movement  in  that  direction.  A 
letter  to  Mr.  Buck  at  the  same  time  throws  an  interest 
ing  light  upon  political  conditions : 

I  think  that  the  situation  yesterday  was  such  that 
there  might  have  been  a  very  good  chance  to  bring  about 
such  a  result  if  it  had  been  thought  advisable,  but  I  could 

1  Of  New  Hampshire. 


506  Orville  H.  Platt 

not  well  talk  with  General  Hawley  about  it,  and  did 
the  next  best  thing  I  could  think  of — consult  you — and 
have  left  it  just  in  the  way  in  which  I  told  you.  But  I 
think  when  Senator  Proctor  finally  left,  it  was  with  some 
idea  that  it  was  possible  that  Mr.  Edmunds  might  not  re 
fuse  an  invitation  to  become  Secretary  of  State,  and  while 
there  was  no  ground  perhaps  for  supposing  that  Mr. 
McKinley  would  ask  him,  that  Senator  Proctor  was  inclined 
to  advise  it  as  a  solution  of  the  New  England  problem.  I 
don't  think  anything  will  come  of  that,  however.  Every 
thing  is  all  at  sea  about  the  Cabinet.  Confidentially,  I 
will  say  to  you  I  think  Mr.  McKinley  did  not  indicate 
to  Allison  that  he  would  be  glad  to  have  him  take  the 
Treasury,  but  did  want  him  to  become  Secretary  of  State. 
Now  the  talk  is  that  he  will  offer  the  Secretaryship  of  State 
to  Mr.  Sherman,  and  how  much  reliance  there  is  to  be 
placed  in  that  I  do  not  know.  I  doubt  it  very  much. 
If  he  should,  and  Senator  Sherman  should  accept,  it  would 
be  very  disappointing  to  those  who  know  Mr.  Sherman. 
I  very  much  fear  that  the  whole  matter  will  be  an  illus 
tration  of  the  old  proverb,  "through  the  woods,  and 
through  the  woods,  and  cut  a  crooked  stick  at  last." 
It  does  not  seem  to  me  that  Mr.  McKinley  has  gone  about 
the  business  of  selecting  a  Cabinet  in  a  way  calculated 
to  produce  the  best  results.  I  fear  he  is  too  much  under 
the  influence  and  direction  of  Mr.  Hanna,  and  that  Cabinet- 
making  is  being  carried  on  somewhat  after  the  methods 
learned  by  Mr.  Hanna  in  his  political  campaign,  but  I  do 
not  know  that  I  am  right  about  this.  If  anything  further 
should  turn  up  looking  to  the  selection  of  a  Cabinet  officer 
from  Connecticut  I  will  consult  with  you  immediately. 

A  week  later  he  felt  impelled  to  appeal  directly  to 
Mr.  Hanna  with  whom  up  to  that  time  he  had  been  in 
only  formal  communication,  thus  initiating  a  correspon 
dence  which  led  to  one  of  the  most  intimate  personal 
associations  of  his  career : 


McKinley  and  Hanna  507 

Honorable  MARK  HANNA,  Cleveland,  Ohio. 
MY  DEAR  SIR: 

Is  this  Cabinet  making  a  case  of  "Ask,  and  ye  shall  re 
ceive,  knock  and  it  shall  be  opened  unto  you,"  or  is  it  a  case 
of  the  President  selecting  a  Cabinet  without  undue  soli 
citation?  I  make  this  inquiry  rather  in  a  playful  than 
serious  frame  of  mind,  because  in  all  the  gossip,  newspaper 
prophesy,  and  assertion,  I  have  seen  no  evidence  that  it  is 
understood  anywhere  that  Connecticut  is  a  New  England 
State  at  all.  Perhaps  it  is  our  fault  that  we  have  not  been 
advertising  and  booming  it. 

Sincerely  yours, 

O.  H.  PLATT. 

From  this  introduction  the  following  entertaining 
correspondence  resulted : 

(Personal) 

CLEVELAND,  OHIO,  January  20,  1897. 

MY  DEAR  SENATOR  PLATT  : 

Like  you,  I  had  supposed  the  selection  of  his  Cabinet 
would  have  been  left  to  the  President  himself,  but  it 
appears  from  the  newspapers  and  some  things  that  have 
happened,  that  such  is  not  to  be  the  case. 

By  the  way,  the  receipt  of  your  letter  was  the  first 
intimation  I  had  received  that  you  are  a  candidate  for 
Cabinet  honors.  Unlike  most  applicants,  you  must  have 
applied  to  the  President  direct,  instead  of  to  me.  Had 
you  filed  your  application  here  we  would  have  boomed  you, 
and  Connecticut  would  have  been  duly  advertised.  Has 
Connecticut  still  a  candidate?  If  so,  we  '11  boom  her. 

Truly  yours, 

M.  A.  HANNA. 

January  25,  1897. 

Honorable  O.  H.  PLATT,  Washington,  D.  C. 
DEAR  MR.  HANNA: 

I  have  your  favor  of  January  2oth.  If  you  suppose 
I  was  writing  my  former  letter  because  I  hoped  that 


5o8  Orville  H.  Platt 

lightning  might  strike  me,  you  were  never  more  mistaken. 
But  I  do  hope  that  General  Hawley  may  be  thought  of  for 
Secretary  of  War  or  of  the  Navy.  I  suppose  it  is  our  own 
fault  that  we  do  not  keep  Connecticut  continually  in  the 
public  eye ;  but  strange  as  it  may  seem,  I  think  we  are  more 
modest  up  in  that  State  than  people  in  other  localities. 

Very  truly  yours, 

O.  H.  PLATT. 

CLEVELAND,  OHIO,  January  28,  1897. 

Honorable  O.  H.  PLATT,  Washington,  D.  C. 
MY  DEAR  SENATOR  : 

I  am  in  receipt  of  yours  of  the  twenty-fifth  instant. 
I  don't  think  \  "suspected"  you,  and  I  am  sure  your  valu 
able  service  in  the  Senate  will  be  a  consolation  to  the  new 
administration. 

I  cannot  give  you  any  reliable  information  as  to  what 
consideration  is  being  given  to  your  State.  Personally, 
I  appreciate  her  loyal  support  in  the  campaign,  and  desire 
to  express  my  high  esteem  of  her  distinguished  Senators. 

Truly  yours, 

M.  A.  HANNA. 

Though  nothing  came  of  the  proposal  to  give  Con 
necticut  representation  in  the  Cabinet,  the  relations  thus 
begun  were  soon  to  become  much  closer.  Mr.  Hanna 
a  few  weeks  later  entered  the  Senate  as  John  Sherman's 
successor,  and  he  lost  no  time  in  cultivating  the  friend 
ship  of  the  older  statesman  for  whom  he  soon  con 
ceived  a  deep  affection,  which  was  returned  in  kind.1 

1  When  Senator  Hanna  was  fighting  hard  for  re-election  in  the 
fall  of  1903,  Mr.  Platt  issued  the  following  statement :  "Ohio  owes 
to  the  country  as  well  as  to  itself  the  return  of  Senator  Hanna  to 
the  United  States  Senate  as  his  own  successor.  He  has  won,  and 
justly  so,  the  position  of  a  trusted  and  conspicuous  Senatorial 
leader.  His  ability,  his  integrity,  and  his  influence  are  recog 
nized  by  all.  Ohio  has  had  many  great  Senators,  but  none  greater 


McKinley  and  Hanna  509 

From  that  time  to  the  day  he  rested  finally  from  his 
labors,  the  Ohio  leader  had  no  closer  or  more  loving 
associate.  For  many  months,  the  two  Senators  lived 
in  neighboring  apartments  at  the  same  hotel ;  for  days 
at  a  time  they  ate  at  the  same  table.  The  intimacy 
between  them  which  grew  from  companionship  and 
mutual  confidence,  served  also  to  bring  the  Connecticut 
Senator  into  confidential  relations  with  the  new 
President.  When  the  Cuban  situation  became  acute 
in  the  following  winter,  Mr.  Platt  was,  next  to  Mr. 
Hanna  himself,  the  Senator  called  into  consultation 
most  frequently  at  the  White  House,  and,  through 
many  trying  weeks  of  anxious  suspense,  he  was  an 
intermediary  between  the  administration  and  the 
Senate.  During  the  months  succeeding  the  war,  when 
new  questions  of  grave  importance  were  pressing  upon 
him,  President  McKinley  turned  instinctively  to  him 
for  counsel  and  support,  and  throughout  the  administra 
tion  he  remained  its  close  and  constant  adviser,  not  only 
in  Cuban  affairs  but  also  on  every  other  serious  govern 
mental  problem.  In  President  McKinley  as  a  man  he 
grew  to  have  an  abiding  faith,  of  which  he  was  never 
reluctant  to  make  profession.  Once  in  the  Senate  he 
said: 

The  people  of  the  country  have  confidence  in  William 
McKinley  as  President  of  the  United  States.  I  go  a  little 
further  than  that,  and  I  aver  that  no  President  of  the 
United  States  while  holding  the  office  of  President  ever 
had  the  confidence,  the  respect,  the  love,  and  the  affection 

I  think  than  Marcus  A.  Hanna,  none  truer,  none  braver,  none 
stronger.  The  effect  of  his  loss  as  a  Senator  can  only  be  compared 
to  the  effect  of  the  loss  of  a  great  general  to  an  army  during  the 
stress  of  battle.  His  return  to  the  Senate  ought  not  to  be  for  a 
moment  in  doubt." 


5io  Orville  H.  Platt 

of  the  people  to  the  extent  which  President  McKinley  has. 
Other  Presidents  have  been  canonized  after  their  death; 
they  have  passed  into  history  as  entitled  to  confidence, 
respect,  and  love,  but  no  President  who,  now  dead,  is  thus 
respected,  ever  escaped  in  office  the  criticisms,  the  in 
nuendoes,  and  the  attacks  which  President  McKinley  has 
justly  escaped. 

When  the  news  came  from  Buffalo  of  the  attack  on 
the  President's  life  Mr.  Platt  thus  gave  expression  to 
his  grief : 

President  McKinley  was  so  great  and  good  and  had  the 
welfare  of  the  whole  people  so  much  at  heart  that  it  seems 
impossible  that  any  human  being  should  wish  to  injure 
him.  No  one  can  find  words  fully  to  express  what  all 
feel.  No  more  dastardly  crime  was  ever  attempted.  The 
weapon  fired  at  the  President  was  aimed  also  at  every 
citizen  of  the  Republic.  In  our  distress  and  fear  we  can 
only  hope  and  pray  and  wait. 


CHAPTER  XXXIX 

ROOSEVELT 

A  Loyal   Supporter  of  Roosevelt — Urges  Nomination   in    1904 — 
Appeals  to  Business  Interests — For  Moderation  in  1905. 

WITH  the  closing  of  the  lid  of  McKinley's  coffin, 
Senator  Platt,  advanced  in  years  though  he 
was,  turned  to  the  future  with  youthful  hope  and 
courage.  Concerning  the  new  President  he  knew  little 
from  personal  contact.  Such  meetings  as  there  had 
been  between  the  two  had  been  casual.  To  Colonel 
Roosevelt  likewise,  Senator  Platt  was  little  better  than 
a  name — one  of  several  whom  he  recognized  as  among 
the  leaders  of  the  Senate.  No  two  men  could  be  more 
unlike  in  temperament.  They  were  as  widely  apart 
in  manner  and  political  association  as  they  were  in 
years.  Yet  they  were  to  be  drawn  close,  one  to  the 
other,  and  to  work  in  effective  co-operation,  though 
not  always  in  complete  accord  as  to  method,  so  long  as 
the  Senator  lived.  The  younger  and  more  impetuous 
man  learned  very  soon  to  look  to  the  elder  for  counsel. 
He  had  not  been  in  the  White  House  a  week  before  he 
sent  for  Mr.  Platt  and  appealed  to  him  for  suggestion 
and  advice.  The  response  was  prompt  and  generous, 
and  from  the  confidence  then  bestowed  there  sprung  a 
liking  between  the  two  which  developed  into  a  strong 
attachment.  "What  an  old  trump  he  is!"  exclaimed 
the  President  on  one  occasion  when  the  support  of 


5i2  Orville  H.  Platt 

Mr.  Platt  had  been  especially  timely;  and  on  another 
occasion,  "Of  all  the  public  men  I  have  known,  he  is  the 
frankest  in  his  political  dealings."  After  the  Senator's 
death,  he  said  to  a  visitor  at  the  White  House,  ' '  He  was 
the  grandest  and  noblest  man  I  ever  knew!"  Senator 
Platt  in  turn  regarded  Roosevelt  as  one  of  the  most 
extraordinary  characters  in  American  history.  He 
believed  in  the  President's  honesty  of  purpose,  in  his 
fearlessness,  and  in  his  ultimate  effectiveness.  Shortly 
after  his  assumption  of  office,  the  President  had  occasion 
to  visit  his  sister  at  her  summer  home  in  Farmington, 
Connecticut,  and  he  invited  the  Senator  and  Mrs.  Platt 
to  meet  him  there.  The  two  talked  over  many  ques 
tions  of  public  policy  freely  and  frankly.  After  the 
meeting,  Mr.  Platt  wrote  to  a  friend  a  strikingly 
prophetic  appreciation  of  the  President's  character  and 
aims: 

I  saw  the  President  last  Tuesday  at  Farmington  and 
had  quite  a  talk  with  him.  I  think  he  will  do  well.  He 
is  as  modest  a  man  as  ever  lived.  Positive,  aggressive, 
and  full  of  intensity,  but,  with  it  all,  he  has  one  thing 
which  is  going  to  take  him  through,  and  that  is  a  deter 
mination  to  do  the  right  thing  as  he  sees  it.  He  will 
stir  up  the  people  in  various  ways,  and  I  think  our  American 
people  are  going  to  like  a  man  who  is  positive,  aggressive, 
and  ambitious — those  elements  in  Jackson  which  gained 
for  him  the  sobriquet  of  "  Old  Hickory, "  and  attached  our 
people  to  him  as  they  have  never  been  attached  to  any 
other  President.  They  like  it;  they  like  a  man  who  is 
something  out  of  the  ordinary,  and  my  present  thought 
about  Roosevelt  is  that  he  is  going  to  have  a  tremendous 
popular  following. 

From  that  time  till  the  day  of  his  death,  Mr. 
Platt,  while  not  agreeing  with  President  Roosevelt  in 


Roosevelt  513 

all  respects,  gave  him  a  loyal  support.  In  the  inner 
councils  of  the  Senate,  he  patiently  impressed  upon  his 
associates  how  indispensable  it  was  always  to  bear  in 
mind  Mr.  Roosevelt's  opinions  and  his  influence  among 
the  people.  Many  a  time  when  the  little  group  of 
Republican  leaders  had  nearly  reached  a  conclusion 
after  a  period  of  communing,  he,  sitting  almost  silent 
until  then,  would  change  the  whole  trend  of  the  talk, 
with  the  slowly  spoken  suggestion:  "But,  you  have 
omitted  a  very  important  consideration — the  Man  in 
the  White  House." 

It  will  never  be  fully  known  how  great  an  influence 
upon  the  history  of  those  days  he  exerted,  through 
temperate  suggestions  at  one  end  of  the  avenue  and 
stimulating  advice  at  the  other.  For  over  three  years 
he,  more  than  any  other,  contributed  to  the  harmonious 
workings  of  the  executive  and  legislative  branches  of 
the  Government. 

As  the  time  for  naming  a  Republican  candidate  in 
1904  approached,  Mr.  Platt  was  one  of  the  first  to  see 
that  the  only  safe  course  for  the  party  was  to  nominate 
Roosevelt  and  go  to  the  people  in  unqualified  endorse 
ment  of  the  Roosevelt  administration.  In  spite  of  his 
warm  friendship  for  Mark  Hanna  he  did  not  hesitate 
when  it  came  to  the  question  with  several  busy  political 
groups  whether  Roosevelt  or  Hanna  should  be  the 
Republican  nominee.  The  fact  that  Hanna' s  nomina 
tion  would  have  been  taken  by  the  country  to  mean  a 
repudiation  of  Roosevelt's  ideals  was  enough  to  de 
termine  his  course.  The  influence  of  the  great  moneyed 
interests,  some  of  which  were  powerfully  exerting 
themselves  in  Hanna' s  behalf,  only  stimulated  him  to 
efforts  for  Roosevelt,  such  as  he  had  never  before 
volunteered  for  a  candidate  for  nomination.  The 


5i4  Orville  H.  Platt 

letters  and  appeals  which  he  sent  out  during  the  months 
preceding  the  Republican  convention  to  his  closest 
correspondents  in  financial  circles,  might  well  become  a 
part  of  the  recorded  history  of  a  strenuous  time. 

As  early  as  May,  1903,  the  question  of  Roosevelt's 
nomination  became  acute  through  Hanna's  opposition 
to  a  formal  endorsement  by  the  Ohio  State  Convention 
— an  opposition  which  was  promptly  withdrawn  after  a 
spirited  exchange  of  telegrams.  Mr.  Platt  writing  to 
Colonel  Philo  Pratt  Hotchkiss,  of  Brooklyn,  on  May 
28th,  touched  on  this  political  incident: 

I  do  not  quite  understand  Hanna's  action  in  opposing 
the  endorsement  of  the  President  by  the  Ohio  Convention. 
Ohio  politics,  like  New  York  politics,  gives  one  the  head 
ache  when  he  attempts  to  study  the  situation  out.  I  think 
Senator  Hanna  has  been  a  very  good  friend  of  President 
Roosevelt's  administration,  perfectly  loyal,  and  in  no 
sense  a  candidate  himself,  but  I  apprehend  that  he  has  felt 
more  strongly  than  Republican  politicians  generally  that 
there  is  a  coolness  toward  the  President  on  the  part  of 
financial  people  in  New  York  and  elsewhere,  and  that  some 
thing  might  happen  between  now  and  1904  which  would 
make  it  impossible  to  secure  their  support  for  him,  and  that, 
therefore,  it  would  be  wiser  not  to  try  to  forestall  the  matter. 
I  feel  pretty  certain  from  what  I  know  of  him  that  Mr. 
Hanna  has  no  other  candidate,  and  that  if  conditions 
should  be  the  same  a  year  hence,  he  would  be  in  favor  of 
the  nomination  of  Mr.  Roosevelt,  but  you  see  he  has  set 
himself  right  in  this  matter.  I  think  he  felt  that  he  had 
made  a  mistake. 

In  spite  of  the  Ohio  episode,  the  talk  about  Hanna's 
candidacy  persisted  and  Connecticut  friends  of  the 
President  began  to  write  the  Senator  anxious  letters. 
To  one  of  these,  late  in  November,  he  replied : 


Roosevelt  515 

If  I  understand  the  situation,  Mr.  Hanna  is  not  a  candi 
date  for  the  Presidency,  will  not  be,  and  deplores  all  this 
talk;  but  how  can  he  stop  it?  That  there  is  an  opposition 
to  the  nomination  of  President  Roosevelt,  is  undoubtedly 
true.  It  is  not  very  extensive,  or  very  influential,  but  noisy, 
and,  in  my  judgment,  will  utterly  fail  when  the  Convention 
is  held — indeed,  I  doubt  if  it  manifests  itself  there.  It 
comes  from  both  ends  of  the  party — from  the  moneyed  in 
fluences  in  Wall  Street,  and  the  agitators  in  the  labor 
movement — one  as  much  as  the  other.  Each  of  these 
elements  wish  to  force  the  President  to  make  terms  with 
them,  but  he  will  not  do  it.  I  think  I  know  that  Senator 
Hanna  does  not  sympathize  with  this  in  the  least.  I  have 
a  higher  regard,  and  more  genuine  respect  for  him  than  you 
seem  to  have.  I  believe  that  he  is  a  straightforward, 
earnest,  truthful  man,  who  acts  from  conviction,  fears  no 
one,  and  makes  no  effort  to  improperly  conciliate  people 
who  disagree  with  him.  He  is  very  much  like  President 
Roosevelt  in  this  respect. 

As  the  interest  became  more  intense  he  volunteered 
appeals  in  quarters  where  he  thought  they  would  be  of 
greatest  value.  To  a  long  valued  friend,  allied  with 
one  of  the  giant  corporations,  he  wrote  on  December 
n,  1903: 

I  do  not  know  just  how  much  importance  to  attach  to 
the  current  opposition  to  Roosevelt,  by  what  are  called  the 
"corporate  and  money  influences"  in  New  York.  There 
is  a  great  deal  said  about  it,  as  if  it  were  widespread  and 
violent.  I  know  that  it  does  not  include  the  whole  of 
that  class  of  people, because  I  know  many  bankers  and  capi 
talists,  railroad  and  business  men,  who  are  his  strong, 
good  friends,  and  they  are  not  among  the  smaller  and 
weaker  parties  either.  They  do  not  talk  as  much  about  it 
as  those  who  oppose  him,  but  they  are,  nevertheless,  loyal 
and  staunch  friends  of  the  President.  Now,  it  is  a  great 


516  Orville  H.  Platt 

mistake  for  capitalistic  interests  to  oppose  Roosevelt.  His 
nomination  is  as  certain  as  the  time  conies,  in  my  judg 
ment.  I  think  he  will  be  nominated  by  acclamation,  so 
what  is  to  be  gained  by  the  Wall  Street  contingent  and  the 
railroad  interests  in  this  seeming  opposition  to  him?  I 
cannot  help  thinking  that  the  New  York  gentlemen  who 
are  supposed  to  be  antagonistic  to  him,  are  making  the 
mistake  of  their  lives,  in  supposing  that  they  can  either 
control  the  Republican  nomination,  or  defeat  Roosevelt,  if 
nominated.  They  seem  to  have  become  possessed  of  the 
idea  that  they  are  the  controlling  forces  in  such  matters; 
that  if  they  do  not  contribute  to  a  large  campaign  fund,  the 
candidate  cannot  be  elected ;  that  if  they  were  to  contribute 
to  the  Democratic  campaign  fund,  that  would  insure  the 
election  of  the  Democrat.  They  do  not  realize  that  they 
have  the  whole  country  against  them.  I  do  not  say  it 
ought  to  be  against  them,  but  that  it  is  against  them,  and 
if  it  were  understood  that  they  were  controlling  the  Re 
publican  nomination,  their  candidate  would  lack  the  sup 
port  of  the  people  generally,  or  if  it  were  thought  that 
Roosevelt  had  made  terms  with  them,  it  would  be  almost 
impossible  to  elect  him.  You  know  how  this  is.  There 
is  a  deep-seated  prejudice  against  the  wealthy  people  on 
the  part  of  the  common  people,  so-called — and  they  will 
not  go  for  what  the  moneyed  classes,  as  they  are  called,  are 
supposed  to  want.  Legislation  cannot  be  defeated  in  any 
way  so  easily  as  to  say  that  the  trusts  want  it.  The  passage 
of  legislation  can  be  in  no  manner  so  easily  insured,  as 
to  say  that  the  trusts  do  not  want  it,  and  by  the  word 
"trusts"  the  people  mean  all  parties  who  are  engaged  in 
large  business  enterprises. 

Now,  these  gentlemen  who  do  not  like  Roosevelt  ought 
to  look  at  it  in  another  way.  They  ought  to  understand 
that  his  nomination  is  a  foregone  conclusion;  that  against 
him  is  to  be  nominated  some  Democrat;  that  the  election 
of  this  Democrat  means  the  election  of  a  Democratic  House 
of  Representatives.  Do  they  realize  what  that  means,  or 


Roosevelt  517 

would  mean  to  business  interests,  and  are  they  willing  to 
illustrate  the  old  saying  of  "A  man  biting  off  his  nose  to 
spite  his  face"?  It  seems  to  me  that  they  are  all  wrong, 
and  very  foolish,  and  that  this  grows  out  of  an  almost 
insane  notion  they  have  that  they  can  control  politics, 
and  that  what  they  say  and  what  they  want  must  be 
accepted. 

I  write  this  to  you  because  I  want  to  get  your  opinion 
of  how  strong  this  opposition  to  Roosevelt  is.  The  opposi 
tion  appears  to  think  that  if  Hanna  should  be  nominated 
he  could  be  elected.  He  could  not  begin  to  be  elected. 
There  is  no  Republican  in  the  United  States  who  can  be 
elected  except  Roosevelt,  and  Hanna  would  be  buried  out 
of  sight.  They  seem  to  think  that  if  they  could  get  George 
Gray  nominated  on  the  Democratic  side,  they  could  elect 
him.  They  can  not  nominate  George  Gray,  and  they  could 
not  elect  him  if  they  did.  They  seem  to  believe  that  they 
could  elect  Parker.  I  know  they  could  not,  but  if  they 
could,  he  would  be  just  what  McClellan  is  going  to  be  as 
Mayor  of  New  York — absolutely  controlled  by  the  most 
dangerous  elements  of  the  Democratic  party.  There  is 
no  use  in  my  running  on  about  this — I  only  want  to 
know  what  you  think  about  it. 

To  the  same  correspondent  on  December  3oth,  he 
wrote  again: 

I  rather  look  now  for  a  nomination  by  acclamation.  The 
criticism  against  him  [Roosevelt]  has  been  tested  and  is 
seen  to  be  carping  only.  It  is  based  on  a  supposed  condi 
tion  which  does  not  exist,  namely:  That  the  President  is 
an  unsafe  man.  I  am  not  his  worshipper,  but  I  do  maintain 
that  he  is  a  conservative  President  rather  than  an  ambi 
tious  or  an  unsafe  one,  and  that  the  country  is  infinitely 
better  off  under  his  administration  than  it  would  be  un 
der  any  Democratic  administration — I  don't  care  who  the 
President  might  be. 


5i 8  Orville  H.  Platt 

A  President  represents  his  party,  and  I  long  ago  made 
up  my  mind  that  the  Democrat  who  poses  as  better  than 
his  party  is  the  most  dangerous  and  unsafe  man  in  it. 
When  you  come  to  think  of  it,  what  reliance  could  be 
placed  on  Parker,  or  Gorman,  or  Olney,  or  Cockrell — the 
four  now  talked  about  as  possible  candidates?  Each 
of  them  would  be  first  a  Democrat,  with  all  the  interests 
of  his  party  at  heart,  and  if,  as  might  be  hoped  by  the  con 
servative  element  of  the  party,  so-called,  he  stood  out 
against  the  great  majority  of  his  party,  he  would  be  with 
out  power.  If  I  were  a  Republican,  fearful  that  Roosevelt 
would  do  something  that  I  thought  he  ought  not  to,  I  would 
not  help  elect  one  of  these  men  in  the  hope  that  he  would 
be  better,  according  to  my  ideas,  than  Roosevelt,  nor 
would  you. 

Mind  you  I  am  not  apologizing  for  or  defending  Roosevelt. 
I  commend  him.  Looking  over  his  whole  legislative  acts 
I  cannot  find  one  that  I  would  have  had  otherwise,  or  one 
which  I  think  was  to  the  detriment  of  our  country.  1 
suppose  that  men  in  New  York  below  Fourteenth  Street 
and  men  in  other  sections  of  the  country  who  take  their 
cue  from  the  former,  would  not  agree  with  me.  The  people 
who  control  great  combinations  of  capital  want  free  course 
to  run  and  be  glorified.  Men  who  have  lost  money  as  the 
result  of  these  great  combinations  also  charge  that  up  to 
the  administration.  Politicians  who  sought  personal  power 
and  aggrandizement  have  been  disappointed,  and  mug 
wumps  think  that  the  President  has  played  politics  too 
much.  Employers  feel  that  the  President  has  sympathized 
too  much  with  labor  unions,  but  the  leaders  of  labor  unions 
think  that  in  the  success  of  the  Democratic  party  their 
schemes  would  be  advanced.  The  opposition  to  Roosevelt 
comes  from  extremists.  While  I  do  not  think  he  can  be 
accused  of  steering  a  middle  course  between  them  for  any 
personal  reasons,  the  fact  that  he  has  not  been  an  extremist, 
demonstrates  what  I  said  a  little  while  ago,  that  he  is  a 
conservative  rather  than  an  unsafe  man.  He  has  had,  I 


Roosevelt  519 

think,  one  idea  which  has  guided  him,  and  that  is  to  do 
what  he  thinks  right  in  every  emergency.  No  man  could 
have  a  stronger  desire  in  this  direction  than  he,  and  that 
is  just  what  the  people  want,  and  it  is  why  the  great  mass 
of  the  Republican  party  supports  him.  And  he  is  going  to 
be  nominated,  and  he  is  going  to  be  elected.  He  is  going 
to  be  the  people's  candidate,  not  the  candidate  of  the 
trusts  or  of  the  hoodlums,  but  of  the  conservative  elements. 

Although  convinced  that  Roosevelt  was  to  be  nomi 
nated,  he  did  not  venture  any  risks  so  far  as  his  own 
State  was  concerned.  To  one  of  the  most  influential 
Republicans  in  the  State,  Charles  F.  Brooker,  he  wrote 
on  February  ist: 

What  do  you  hear  about  delegates  from  Connecticut  to 
the  National  Convention?  I  have  not  one  word  to  say 
as  to  who  should  go,  but  I  do  hope  that  no  one  will  be 
complimented  by  being  selected  unless  it  is  understood 
that  he  is  for  Roosevelt.  We  have  never  instructed  in  our 
Conventions,  and  have  heretofore  sent  persons  more  because 
they  were  anxious  to  go  than  because  they  were  in  favor 
of  any  particular  candidate,  with  the  result  that  we  have 
had  divided  delegations.  I  am  very  anxious,  as  I  know  you 
are,  to  have  a  solid  Roosevelt  delegation,  and  to  be  certain 
that  no  one  goes  who  is  opposed  to  him.  No  such  person 
should  be  permitted  to  go  just  because  he  is  a  good  fellow 
and  wants  to  go. 

Roosevelt  was  nominated  by  acclamation,  as  prob 
ably  would  have  been  the  case,  even  had  Mark  Hanna 
lived;  for  before  Mr.  Hanna  took  to  his  bed  in  his 
final  illness,  the  nomination  of  the  President  was 
assured.  Throughout  the  pre-convention  season,  and 
later,  during  the  campaign,  Senator  Platt,  with  sure 
political  insight,  insisted  that  the  President's  personal 
ity  must  be  the  dominating  note.  To  Representative 


520  Orville  H.  Platt 

E.  J.  Hill,  a  few  weeks  before  the  Chicago  Convention, 
he  wrote: 

"  The  point  in  the  platform  should  be  Roosevelt — 
that  is  what  we  have  to  stand  on." 

This  theme  he  emphasized  in  every  speech  he  made 
during  the  campaign.  Presiding  over  the  State  Con 
vention  at  Hartford,  on  September  i3th,  he  said: 

If  the  Democratic  party  chooses  to  make  Roosevelt, 
the  man,  the  issue  in  this  campaign  we  welcome  that  issue 
without  fear.  Every  citizen  of  the  United  States,  from  the 
professional  politician  to  the  schoolboy  in  his  teens,  knows 
that  in  the  heart  of  Theodore  Roosevelt,  the  President, 
there  is  one  overshadowing  purpose,  and  that  is  to  do 
what  Roosevelt,  the  man,  believes  to  be  honest,  right, 
and  true.  What  has  he  done  that  was  not  honest,  right,  and 
true?  In  the  interest  of  all  that  makes  for  American 
honor  let  us  have  a  President  who  has  but  one  guiding 
principle,  and  that  to  do  what  he  believes  to  be  right,  for 
the  honor  of  his  country,  for  the  upbuilding  of  its  people, 
for  the  glory  of  its  name. 

Would  you  have  the  people  think  him  unsafe  ?  No  man 
is  unsafe  whose  life  is  clean,  and  pure,  and  noble,  and  who 
walks  in  one  path  only,  the  path  where  duty  seems  to  him 
to  point.  In  all  that  represents  American  manhood, 
American  character,  American  progress,  American  welfare, 
Theodore  Roosevelt  stands  forth  to-day  our  most  conspicu 
ous  example.  It  was  because  the  Republicans  of  the  United 
States  recognized  this  that  they  demanded  with  one  voice 
that  he  should  be  called  to  further  duty  and  further  service, 
in  that  most  exalted  of  all  places,  in  that  most  responsible 
and  wearing  of  all  positions,  the  Presidency  of  the  United 
States.1 

1  At  the  Hyperion  Theatre  in  New  Haven,  on  November  36, 
when  he  occupied  the  platform  jointly  with  Mr.  Taft,  he  said  in 
the  course  of  a  glowing  eulogy  of  the  President:  "I  want  to  speak 
of  a  man — I  may  say  the  man,  who  more  than  any  other  to-day, 


Roosevelt  521 

No  sooner  was  the  election  over  than  the  forces  of 
unrest  began  to  bestir  themselves.  Newspapers,  con 
stantly  on  the  lookout  for  political  sensation,  encouraged 
and  predicted  radical  doings  at  Washington.  The 
President,  sustained  by  an  unprecedented  expression  of 
popular  confidence,  was  credited  with  all  sorts  of  revo 
lutionary  intentions.  There  was  to  be  an  immediate 
revision  of  the  tariff.  The  trusts  were  to  be  attacked 
without  mercy  and  beaten  into  submission;  the  rail 
roads  were  to  be  brought  to  book.  The  air  was  full  of 

fills  the  mind  and  heart  of  the  American  people.  That  man  is 
Theodore  Roosevelt.  Failing  in  an  appeal  to  the  people  on  ques 
tions  usually  called  'issues,'  the  opposition  has  concentrated  with 
batteries  of  folly  and  hate  upon  him.  They  have  made  Theodore 
Roosevelt  the  man,  and  the  President,  the  issue  in  this  campaign, 
and  we  accept  it  willingly,  joyfully  even — for  if  it  were  possible 
to  conceive  of  the  American  people  turning  their  backs  on  Theodore 
Roosevelt,  it  would  mark  the  beginning  of  the  reversal  of  those 
policies  and  principles  and  deeds  that  have,  in  these  last  eight 
years,  made  us  the  greatest  of  all  peoples  under  the  sun.  But 
what  of  the  man  ?  No  manlier  man  has  ever  lived  in  our  history. 
In  all  those  qualities  which  make  up  the  sum  of  American  manhood, 
he  has  no  superior.  Intense  physical,  mental,  and  moral  strength 
are  his  characteristics.  Honesty  that  goes  to  the  very  core  of  his 
being;  patriotism  that  dominates  every  thought  and  act;  energies 
that  seek  the  realization  of  the  highest  ideals  in  life  and  govern 
ment — these  are  the  characteristics  of  Theodore  Roosevelt.  Grad 
uated  from  Harvard  twenty -four  years  ago,  his  record  and  life  prove 
conclusively  the  qualities  which  I  have  ascribed  to  him.  It  is  a  life 
and  a  record  of  which  statesmen  are  proud,  which  the  young  men 
of  the  Republic  should  emulate,  which  the  children  should  study, 
as  they  study  the  lives  of  the  world's  great  men.  He  came  to 
his  present  station  without  intrigue,  and  without  self-seeking. 
He  was  nominated  for  the  Vice-Presidency  in  1900  because  the 
people  of  the  United  States  had  come  to  know  him,  because  his 
fame  had  covered  the  land  between  the  two  oceans,  and  because 
the  thoughtful  and  far-seeing  citizens  saw  in  him  the  man  most 
fitted  to  be  associated  with  William  McKinley,  and  if  the  occasion 
ever  came,  to  take  up  the  work  of  that  great,  gracious,  beloved — 
now  martyred — President." 


522  Orville  H.  Platt 

disturbing  rumors.  Mr.  Platt  was  distressed  by  the 
tone  of  newspaper  comment.  To  a  brother  Senator, 
four  days  after  the  election,  he  wrote : 

It  is  a  time  to  go  slow.  It  is  a  time  for  the  President 
to  drop  the  strenuous,  and  take  up  the  simple  life  for  a  while. 
He  ought  not,  in  my  judgment,  to  make  one  single  positive 
recommendation  in  his  next  message — there  is  no  oc 
casion  for  it.  We  want  time  to  think  and  to  turn  around. 
A  lot  of  mischief  can  be  done  if  we  do  not  have  it,  and  be 
twixt  the  construction  of  the  Cabinet  and  the  recommenda 
tions  for  legislation,  the  newspaper  correspondents,  who 
have  nothing  else  to  do,  will  have  the  whole  country 
stirred  up. 

The  President  respected  newspaper  forecasts  in  his 
annual  message  only  in  the  recommendation  of  stringent 
legislation  regarding  railroad  rates ;  but  throughout  the 
winter  the  chorus  of  radicalism  increased  and  Mr. 
Platt  with  other  staunch  Republicans  began  to  fear 
for  the  future.  He  felt  that  something  would  have 
to  be  done  sooner  or  later  toward  the  regulation  of 
railroad  rates,  but  he  did  not  believe  that  the  time  was 
immediately  ripe  and  he  was  averse  to  drastic  legislation 
at  any  time.  His  mind  was  filled  with  a  vague  dread. 
To  a  leading  Connecticut  business  man  he  wrote  on 
January  16,  1905: 

I  wonder  if  people  around  the  country  worry  as  much 
over  things  as  I  do.  I  hope  not.  There  are  tendencies 
now  which  I  do  not  like  very  well,  and  yet  I  question 
whether  or  not  I  am  too  much  of  an  old  fogy  to  keep  up 
with  the  procession,  or  whether  the  procession  is  really 
moving  too  fast. 

In  one  of  his  last  letters,  written  only  a  few  weeks 
before  his  death,  he  lamented:  "Congress  is  just  as 


Roosevelt  523 

likely  to  go  wild  some  day  as  the  Kansas  legislature, 
and  a  conservative  man  is  liable  any  moment  to  find 
himself  trampled  out  of  sight." 

Through  all  this  time  and  up  to  the  hour  of  his  final 
departure  from  Washington  he  was  in  constant  com 
munication  with  the  White  House  and  it  was  his  pleasure 
to  advance  so  far  as  he  could  in  the  Senate  the  arbitration 
treaties  which  the  administration  keenly  desired. 
What  would  have  been  his  course  in  the  fruitful  days 
so  soon  to  follow  is  a  question  which  those  who  sur 
vived  him  have  often  asked  themselves,  grieving  that 
at  so  critical  a  time  the  country  should  not  have  had 
the  benefit  of  his  sage  and  patriotic  counsel. 


CHAPTER  XL 

POLITICS  AND  PATRONAGE 

A  Stranger  to  Political  Manipulation — Annoyed  by  Office  Seekers 
— Zealous  for  Connecticut. 

ra  mastery  of  the  art  of  politics,  Mr.  Platt  made 
no  pretension.  The  details  of  the  machinery  of 
political  management  carried  no  special  appeal  to  him. 
In  his  earlier  years  he  had  taken  an  active  interest  in 
the  work  of  party  organization,  first  with  the  American 
or  "Know  Nothing"  party,  and  later  with  the  Republi 
can  party,  but  it  had  been  because  he  saw  in  that  occu 
pation  a  means  to  great  ends  to  which  he  pinned  his 
faith.  Prior  to  1856  he  had  been  Chairman  of  the 
State  Committee  of  the  American  party,  which  seemed 
to  him  as  a  young  man  to  offer  at  the  moment  the 
weapon  closest  at  hand  for  striking  a  blow  at  the  cause 
of  slavery.  A  little  later  he  became  identified  with 
the  Republican  organization,  which  was  to  hold  his 
allegiance  to  the  end,  and  there,  too,  he  speedily  came 
to  participate  in  the  active  management  of  the  party's 
affairs,  serving  for  a  time  as  Chairman  of  the  State 
Committee.  He  showed  throughout  this  stage  of  his 
career  a  high  talent  for  organization  and  there  never 
was  a  time  when  he  did  not  emphasize  among  his  politi 
cal  associates  the  importance  of  systematized  political 
effort.  But  of  the  more  subtle  art  of  manipulation,  of 
trades,  of  combinations,  he  was  as  innocent  as  a  child, 

524 


Politics  and  Patronage  525 

and  he  disdained  to  avail  himself  of  it  even  when  his 
personal  political  fortunes  were  at  hazard.  Writing 
on  March  30,  1896,  to  Charles  F.  Chapin,  the  editor  of 
the  Waterbury  American  he  said: 

Much  obliged  for  your  editorial  in  the  American  referring 
to  myself.  And  yet,  I  think  the  Herald  is  pretty  nearly 
right  in  its  assertion  that  I  am  ' '  not  an  expert  in  the  arts 
of  the  politician" — that  is  to  say,  I  have  never  had  any 
personal  political  following  in  Connecticut.  I  have  never 
tried  to  influence  nominations  or  to  build  myself  up  by 
patronage  or  bargains.  I  can  not  do  it  now,  if  I  would, 
and  I  will  not.  I  could  no  more  attempt  to  make  an  organi 
zation  which  would  look  after  the  nominations  for  the 
Senate  and  the  House  in  my  interest  than  I  could  fly. 
I  have  had  just  one  object  and  purpose  here,  and  that  is 
to  represent  my  State  as  well  as  I  could  in  the  Senate.  I 
incline  to  the  belief  that  a  large  majority  of  Republicans 
would  be  glad  to  see  me  re-elected,  and  if  so,  I  hope  that 
their  wishes  may  prevail  against  any  arts  of  expert  politi 
cians.  If  the  people  want  someone  else,  I  shall,  of  course, 
submit  with  the  best  grace  that  I  can. 

Writing  about  the  same  time  to  J.  H.  McDonald  of 
New  Haven,  he  gave  expression  to  the  same  thought  in 
a  little  different  way: 

You  see  that  I  have  no  organization.  I  never  have  at 
tempted  to  have  one.  I  have  never  felt  that  it  was  neces 
sary  to  have  a  Platt  party  in  Connecticut.  I  have  been 
quite  content  to  commend  myself,  if  I  could,  by  my  actions, 
to  the  confidence  of  the  people  generally  so  I  am  in  just 
this  situation — I  think  from  what  I  hear  that  among  the 
voters  of  the  Republican  party  there  is  generally  speaking 
a  desire  that  I  should  be  returned  as  Senator.  If  this  senti 
ment  exists,  it  exists  without  any  organization  upon  my 
part;  without  any  effort  to  create  it  through  the  efforts 
of  political  friends  in  the  different  sections  and  towns  of 


526  Orville  H.  Platt 

the  State.  And  while  in  a  way,  I  know,  and  am  in  touch 
with  a  good  many  Republicans  in  most  of  the  towns,  I  have 
never  asked  them  the  question  whether  they  were  for  my 
return,  and  I  never  asked  them  to  do  anything  for  me. 

He  never  had  a  political  manager  or  a  personal  rep 
resentative  in  Connecticut  to  keep  an  eye  on  his  politi 
cal  fences.  Replying  on  July  14,  1895,  to  an  intimate 
friend  who  had  advised  him  to  let  whoever  was  look 
ing  after  his  interests  attend  to  the  publication  and 
distribution  of  a  speech,  he  said: 

There  is  no  one,  absolutely  no  one  looking  out  for  my 
interests ;  plenty  of  good  friends  but  no  one  to  plan  or  give 
time  or  thought  or  labor  to  any  work  in  my  behalf.  This 
may  seem  strange  to  you,  but  it  is  literally  true.  I  can 
really  do  nothing  for  myself,  and  there  is  no  one  to  do  any 
thing  for  me,  except  to  wish  me  Well  and  assure  me  that 
nothing  needs  to  be  done. 

That  even  to  the  end  of  his  career,  however,  he 
showed  an  appreciation  of  the  larger  forces  of  politics 
— of  the  influence  of  the  press,  of  systematic  canvasses, 
of  deliberate  cultivation  of  public  sentiment,  is  shown 
throughout  his  correspondence;  and  he  regarded  it 
always  as  a  proper  function  for  a  United  States  Senator 
to  watch  and  encourage  these  forces,  although  he  seems 
rarely  to  have  used  his  influence,  save  when  greatly 
moved,  as  during  the  campaign  of  1904,  when  the  elec 
tion  of  President  Roosevelt  was  in  the  balance.  He  was 
then  at  his  home  in  Judea,  and  becoming  anxious  about 
the  way  things  were  going  in  Connecticut,  he  wrote,  on 
September  i9th,  to  Michael  Kenealy,  Chairman  of  the 
Republican  State  Central  Committee;  after  reviewing 
the  situation  generally,  and  pointing  out  dangers 
and  pitfalls,  he  concluded: 


Politics  and  Patronage  527 

Now,  why  all  this  talk  ?  Simply  that  I  think  the  Republi 
can  State  Committee  ought  to  make  unusual  efforts  for 
thorough  organization  and  active  work  at  once.  Years 
ago  we  used  to  have  a  canvass  of  the  State,  a  regular  house 
to  house  canvass,  so  that  what  every  voter  was  going  to 
do  was  known  in  advance.  Then  came  our  registration 
law,  and  the  work  of  making  a  canvass  fell  into  disuse 
and  the  registrars  were  looked  to  for  the  information.  I 
do  not  suppose  that  it  is  possible  to  go  back  to  the  old  way 
of  doing  things.  It  was  a  time  when  Republican  workers 
used  to  do  it  for  the  love  of  the  thing,  and  men  were  found 
in  every  town  who  were  glad  to  do  it,  and  did  it  effectively, 
and  it  seems  to  me  that  something  should  be  devised  to  get 
better  information  than  we  have  been  in  the  habit  of 
getting  lately.  I  do  not  know  what,  I  am  sure,  but  it  has 
seemed  to  me  that  this  was  manifestly  a  campaign  which 
ought  to  attract  the  young  men,  and  young  men  in  every 
town  might  be  stirred  up  to  the  work.  .  .  . 

I  do  not  know  how  you  are  going  to  reach  the  towns. 
You  have  your  State  Committee,  the  members  of  which  are 
so  filled  with  other  schemes  for  nomination  of  state  officers 
and  Senators  and  Representatives,  that  they  work  at  that 
more  than  they  work  for  a  complete  and  effective  organiza 
tion  of  voters.  The  first  Monday  of  October  is  right  on 
us — it  comes  on  the  third,  and  that  is  only  thirteen  days 
off.  We  have  had  very  great  success  in  carrying  the  towns 
until  we  have  such  a  large  proportion  of  them  that  it  is 
hard  to  increase  it,  and  easy  to  lose  some  towns.  If  there 
is  a  falling  off  in  the  number  of  towns  we  carry,  it  will  be 
heralded  as  an  indication  of  Democratic  strength  and  will 
give  the  Democrats  hope. 

It  was  not  often  that  he  permitted  himself  to  enter 
thus  explicitly  into  the  details  of  management.  His 
first  election  to  the  Senate  had  been  effected  with  the 
expenditure  of  hardly  any  money,  and  without  the  stain 
of  a  combination  or  trade  and  every  subsequent  election 


528  Orville  H.  Platt 

came  with  unanimity.  To  the  election  of  delegates  for 
national  conventions,  to  the  influencing  of  the  choice  of 
the  State  for  a  Republican  nominee  for  President,  he 
was  customarily  indifferent.  His  only  interest  was 
that  the  State  of  Connecticut  should  not  be  subject 
to  misrepresentation  in  the  national  councils  of  the 
party.  He  believed  religiously  in  putting  none  but 
Republicans  on  guard1  but  the  "spoils  of  office"  was 
distasteful  to  him.  "I  hate  the  whole  thing  which  is 
known  as  patronage"  he  wrote  to  G.  Wells  Root  of 
Hartford,  March  4,  1890,  "and  want  to  have  just  as 
little  to  do  with  it  as  is  consistent  with  my  duty  to  the 
State,"  and  toward  the  end  of  his  service  he  wrote  to  a 
department  official:  "I  long  ago  learned  that  when  a 
person  is  appointed  on  my  recommendation,  it  only 
makes  me  a  lot  of  additional  worry  and  trouble."  Yet 
he  was  compelled  to  participate  to  some  extent  in  the 
scramble  for  office,  particularly  in  1889  and  1897, 
when  the  Republicans  came  into  power  after  periods  of 
Democratic  control.  His  experiences,  at  the  beginning 
of  the  Harrison  administration  especially,  resulted  in 
vexation  of  spirit,  as  a  glance  at  correspondence  written 
while  he  was  passing  through  them  will  show.  To  a 
Hartford  applicant  for  office,  who  complained  that  he 
had  not  been  considerately  treated,  Mr.  Platt  wrote  on 
March  25,  1889: 

I  regret  that  you  should  have  been  disappointed  in  your 
interviews  with  me,  or  should  have  felt  that  I  had  anything 
but  a  kind  feeling  toward  you.  I  did  not  intend  to  convey 

i  "The  only  suggestion  that  I  want  to  make  to  you  about  the 
appointments  of  deputies  is  that  you  should  n't  appoint  Democrats 
in  any  instance.  It  is  very  few  offices  that  we  have,  and  I  want 
them  to  be  filled  by  Republicans." — Letter  to  E.  F.  Strong,  Bridge 
port,  Aug.  13,  1890. 


Politics  and  Patronage  529 

any  such  impression ;  but  you  took  me  at  a  time  when  I  had 
not  averaged  more  than  five  hours'  sleep  for  ten  days — the 
last  days  of  the  session  being  spent  in  severe  work  and  at  a 
time  when  others  were  waiting  for  me,  and  when  everyone 
I  saw  wanted  me  to  do  something  to  get  them  an  office. 
Perhaps  I  was  impatient.  ...  I  recognize  fully  your  ser 
vices  for  the  Republican  party,  and  do  not  intend  in  any  way 
to  belittle  them.  If  there  is  anything  I  can  do  in  the  way 
of  helping  you  to  a  position  which  would  be  agreeable  to 
you,  and  to  which  you  would  be  adapted,  I  should  be  quite 
willing  to  do  so.  But  there  seems  to  be  an  erroneous  idea — 
I  won't  say  that  you  have  it — that  in  some  way  I  have 
offices  to  dispose  of,  or  that  I  can  get  people  appointed  to 
office  by  merely  saying  so,  whereas,  I  find,  and  am  made 
to  feel  every  day,  that  Connecticut  is  an  exceedingly  small 
State,  and  gets  very  little  consideration. 

To  Samuel  H.  Crampton  of  Madison,  Connecticut, 
he  wrote  on  April  5,  1890: 

I  know  there  is  disappointment  more  or  less  marked 
and  felt  over  appointments;  but  if  you  will  think  of  it 
for  a  moment  I  think  you  will  conclude  that  this  is  in 
evitable.  I  do  not  believe  any  power  short  of  omniscience 
could  avoid  it;  and  you  know  that,  although  the  Supreme 
Being  is  omniscient,  there  are  a  great  many  people  who  are 
not  ready  to  think  that  what  he  does  and  orders  is  the 
best  thing  after  all. 

I  wish  it  were  possible  to  get  along  and  have  every  one 
satisfied;  but  it  never  was  and  never  will  be  under  our 
system  of  selecting  officials.  And  I  do  not  know  that  that 
system  can  be  improved.  It  seems  to  me  one  of  the  weak 
spots  in  our  Government.  When  we  have  carried  an  elec 
tion,  the  attention  of  the  people  is  turned,  at  once,  away 
from  the  principles  which  have  been  fought  out,  to  the 
question  of  who  will  get  the  offices. 

As  to  general  appointments,  there  can  not  be  one  for 

34 


530  Orville  H.  Platt 

every  fifty  persons  who  want  them;  and,  when  it  comes 
down  to  local  offices,  it  is  very  seldom  that  there  is  any 
unanimity  as  to  who  should  fill  them;  and  so  a  large 
portion  of  the  Republicans  feel,  whatever  is  done,  that 
their  ideas  of  what  is  best  were  disregarded.  Of  course 
the  man  who  gets  the  office  and  his  friends  are  satisfied, 
but  they  are  usually  in  the  minority ;  that  is,  other  persons 
who  wanted  the  office,  and  their  friends,  are  the  larger 
number;  and  so  there  inevitably  comes  a  feeling  of  disap 
pointment  and  discouragement,  and  it  finds  expression 
in  criticisms  more  or  less  pronounced.  If  you  will  think 
of  it  for  a  moment  you  will  see  that  this  must  be  so.  .  .  . 
Really,  however,  the  offices  are  but  a  minor  part  of  politics ; 
measures  are  of  infinitely  more  consequence  than  men ;  and 
whether  a  particular  man  is  Senator  or  Governor  or  post 
master,  or  any  other  official,  is  a  matter  of  small  conse 
quence  compared  with  the  principles  which  obtain  in 
government. 

To  a  disappointed  Hartford  aspirant  he  said : 

However  disagreeable  any  appointments  may  have  been 
to  you,  I  want  you  to  stop  a  minute  before  you  finally 
conclude  upon  the  action  indicated  in  your  letter.  Do 
not  commit  yourself  in  the  direction  you  speak  of  just  now. 
I  would  like  to  have  an  opportunity  to  talk  it  over  with 
you  before  we  part  political  company.  I  do  not  care 
anything  about  the  next  election  in  Connecticut,  so  far 
as  my  personal  fortunes  are  concerned.  I  am  quite  ready, 
if  Connecticut  wants  to  send  some  other  Republican  to  the 
Senate,  to  coincide  with  the  wishes  of  the  people  in  that 
respect.  But  I  should  be  mortified  to  have  Connecticut 
send  a  Democrat  to  the  Senate,  and  notwithstanding  your 
present  disappointment,  I  think  you  would  be  also. 

It  was  bad  enough  to  be  fretted  with  the  local  rivalries 
of  politicians  at  home  but  even  more  exasperating  was 
the  demand  upon  him  from  clerks  in  the  departments 


Politics  and  Patronage  531 

in  Washington  who  claimed  Connecticut  as  their  legal 
residence  and  who  looked  to  his  influence  for  increase  in 
salary.  One  of  these,  a  clerk  in  the  pension  office  who 
had  been  especially  insistent  in  his  demands,  elicited  a 
rejoinder  which  he  was  not  likely  soon  to  forget : 

I  tell  you  very  frankly  I  do  not  like  the  method  which 
you  take  with  reference  to  your  promotion,  or  the  tone  of 
your  letters  to  me  on  the  subject.  I  have  been  disposed 
to  help  you.  I  have  spent  more  time  trying  to  help  you 
than  in  case  of  any  other  clerk  in  Washington.  I  do  not 
like  this  continued  prodding  and  continued  instruction 
on  your  part  as  to  what  I  am  to  do  in  the  matter.  You 
evidently  misunderstand  the  position  and  duties  of  a 
Senator. 

The  demand  upon  him  at  the  beginning  of  the 
McKinley  administration  was  not  nearly  as  trying  as 
it  had  been  eight  years  earlier,  and  with  advancing  years 
he  seems  to  have  been  relieved  somewhat  of  the 
importunity  of  office  seekers,  greatly  to  his  satisfaction. 
Once  in  a  while  he  would  be  called  upon  to  make 
requests  at  the  White  House  or  the  departments. 
He  would  always  do  what  he  could,  though  pleading 
lack  of  influence,  as  in  the  case  of  the  Litchfield  County 
clergyman  who  asked  him  to  secure  a  boy's  appoint-' 
ment  to  Annapolis,  and  to  whom  he  replied : 

I  do  not  think  that  I  have  any  considerable  influence 
with  this  administration  in  such  matters.  I  have  tried 
in  times  past,  the  best  I  knew  how,  to  obtain  such  appoint 
ments  from  the  President  to  the  naval  academy  or  to 
West  Point,  and  always  without  success.  I  do  not  belong 
to  the  crowd  of  politicians,  and  when  a  man  who  will  not 
place  himself  under  obligations,  encounters  those  who  are 
willing  to  render  favors  when  they  ask  favors,  he  has  very 


532  Orville  H.  Platt 

little  of  that  thing  which  is  popularly  called  "influence." 
Nevertheless,  I  will  do  all  I  can. 

He  was  chary  of  promises  and  scrupulously  re 
luctant  to  take  credit  for  results  to  which  he  felt  he  had 
not  effectively  contributed,  as  when  he  refused  to 
accept  the  thanks  of  a  New  York  clergyman  whose 
brother  had  received  an  appointment,  "because  it 
came  about  independent  of  any  effort  upon  my  part,'* 
and  that,  too,  though  he  had  written  many  letters  and 
been  at  considerable  pains  to  enable  the  young  man  to 
qualify. 

While  out  of  patience  with  the  whole  scheme  of  patron 
age,  Mr.  Platt  was  jealous  of  the  claims  of  his  State 
to  proportionate  representation  in  the  public  service. 
When  President  McKinley  succeeded  President  Cleve 
land  he  strove  religiously  to  secure  for  Connecticut  a 
continuance,  under  Republican  administration,  of  the 
more  important  offices  which  had  been  enjoyed  by 
Connecticut  Democrats — not,  however,  with  any  great 
success.  During  the  Roosevelt  administration  the 
consul-general  at  Ottawa,  a  Connecticut  man,  resigned, 
and  the  President  promptly  named  a  new  consul- 
general  without  conferring  with  the  Connecticut 
Senators.  "I  have  not  yet  learned  who  the  President 
appointed,"  Mr.  Platt  wrote  to  a  Connecticut  Repre 
sentative,  ' '  but  I  do  not  take  it  kindly  that  immediately 
and  without  waiting  to  hear  from  me,  he  should  fill  that 
place.  I  propose  to  have  it  out  with  him  when  I  see 
him!" 

A  Connecticut  candidate  for  general  appraiser  in 
New  York  was  told  that  he  might  make  application  for 
the  position  of  assistant  appraiser,  but  that  he  would 
need  the  endorsement  of  Senator  Thomas  C.  Platt. 


r 

Politics  and  Patronage  533 

This  filled  the  Connecticut  Platt  with  wrath.  He 
wrote  to  Secretary  Shaw: 

I  want  to  say  that  I  do  not  think  it  necessary  that  a  man, 
whose  residence  is  in  Connecticut,  should  be  required 
either  to  show  that  he  belongs  to  the  Republican  organiza 
tion  in  New  York  or  that  he  has  obtained  the  endorsement 
of  Senator  Platt  of  New  York,  as  a  condition  of  appoint 
ment.  The  State  of  Connecticut  is  as  much  within  the 
customs  district  of  New  York  as  is  the  State  of  New  York, 
and  the  appraiser's  duties  affect  business  in  Connecticut, 
the  same  as  in  New  York.  I  do  not  acknowledge  the 
right  of  Senator  Platt  to  control  these  appointments.  If 

you  would  be  willing  to  appoint  Mr.  on  his  merits 

and  endorsements,  and  from  what  you  know,  and  have 
learned  of  him,  I  think  my  recommendation  should  be  just 
as  potential  as  that  of  Senator  Platt  of  New  York.  I  do 
not  think  that  any  of  the  appointments  connected  with  the 
New  York  custom-house  ought  to  be  considered  political 
appointments ;  I  believe  that  they  should  be  made  on  purely 
business  principles,  and  for  the  benefit  of  the  service,  rather 
than  for  the  benefit  of  any  political  organization. 

When  the  same  man,  having  received  the  appoint 
ment,  asked  his  advice  about  joining  the  Republican 
organization  in  New  York,  Mr.  Platt  advised  him  not 
to  do  it : 

I  presume  I  could  take  care  of  you  in  case  of  difficulty, 
better  as  a  Connecticut  man,  than  as  a  New  York  man. 
I  imagine  that  backing  from  New  York  requires  a  lot  of 
political  subserviency — backing  from  Connecticut  will  not. 

It  happened  that  on  his  very  last  call  at  the  White 
House, — on  March  25,  1905,  a  few  hours  before  his  final 
departure  from  Washington,  the  talk  turned  upon  the 
subject  of  Connecticut's  meagre  representation  in  the 
public  service.  Under  the  Cleveland  administration 
the  State  had  been  recognized  by  some  of  the  choicest 


534  Orville  H.  Platt 

appointments  in  the  President's  gift:  Treasurer  of  the 
United  States,  Consul-General  at  London,  Commissioner 
of  Patents,  and  numerous  consuls  and  minor  officers. 
As  these  places  became  vacant,  they  had  been  filled 
gradually  by  appointments  from  other  States.  On 
returning  to  his  rooms  Mr.  Platt  dictated  the  following 
letter  to  the  President  : 

Referring  to  our  conversation  this  morning,  you  will 
realize  that  in  all  the  years  you  have  been  President  I 
have  not  pushed  or  begged  for  appointments.  The  result 
is,  as  I  indicated  this  morning,  that  Connecticut  has  no 
foreign  minister,  no  secretary  of  legation,  no  consul-general, 
no  person  connected  with  the  departments  who  has  to  be 
confirmed  by  the  Senate,  with  the  exception  of  one — a  two 
thousand  dollar  place  in  the  land  office.  I  think  it  is  my 
fault;  I  should  have  been  urgent  and  persistent,  but  I  do 
not  like  to  be.  It  is  not  because  we  have  no  good  men  in 
the  State,  though  I  do  not  think  there  is  the  usual  pressure 
for  office  from  Connecticut,  but  we  are  a  million  of  people 
and  more;  we  are  a  part  of  New  England,  though  it  seems 
to  be  forgotten  over  offices,  and  I  really  think  it  would 
be  a  good  thing  all  around  if  Connecticut  were  recognized 
in  some  rather  conspicuous  way,  all  of  which  leads  up 
to  the  suggestion  that  Mr.  Lynde  Harrison  of  New  Haven, 
would,  I  think,  be  a  very  capable  and  accomplished  foreign 
minister.  He  is  a  lawyer  of  sufficient  fortune  so  that  he 
does  not  care  to  continue  practice.  He  is  well  informed 
both  as  to  our  own  government  and  our  foreign  relations.  I 
need  not  go  on  praising  him,  because  I  can  say  it  all  in  a 
word — I  think  he  is  peculiarly  well  qualified  for  such  a 
position.  I  would  trust  him  in  the  most  difficult  one 
that  could  be  selected.  I  hope  the  time  may  come  when  it 
can  be  brought  about. 

This  was  the  last  letter  which  he  addressed  to  the 
President.  The  appointment  could  not  be  made. 


CHAPTER  XLI 
CONNECTICUT'S  FIRST  CITIZEN 

Successive  Elections  to  Senate  without  Opposition — Lack  of 
Personal  Organization — Offer  of  Position  as  Chief- Justice  of 
Supreme  Court  of  Errors — Rejects  Suggestion  of  Selection 
as  President  pro  tern. 

"  A  LL  the  politics  of  Connecticut,"  Mr.  Platt  once 
/i  observed  grimly,  ''seems  to  depend  on  which  is 
going  to  die  first,  Hawley  or  I."  The  remark  disclosed 
a  humorous  insight  into  a  situation  creditable  alike  to 
Senators  and  State.  It  is  true  there  were  those  who 
would  gladly  have  represented  the  State  in  the  Senate, 
but  so  great  was  the  regard  for  Platt  that  no  one  ever 
ventured  to  carry  into  the  Legislature  a  contest  for  his 
place,  and  though  Hawley  had  a  harder  time  of  it,  the 
State  always  rallied  to  his  support.  When  he  first 
entered  the  Senate  Mr.  Platt  laid  down  a  rule  that  so 
long  as  he  remained  there  he  would  not  meddle  with  the 
internal  politics  of  Connecticut.  He  had  an  idea  that 
he  could  best  please  the  people  of  the  State  by  serving 
them  to  the  limit  of  his  ability  in  Washington  without 
bothering  about  political  rivalries  at  home,  and  so  he 
scrupulously  abstained  from  anything  which  might 
lead  to  a  suspicion  that  he  was  trying  to  interfere 
with  local  affairs.  After  entering  the  Senate  he  never 
asked  for  a  State  appointment  or  attempted  to 
influence  the  State  officers  who  had  appointments  to 
make.  He  carried  this  feeling  even  to  the  length  of 

535 


536  Orville  H.  Platt 

keeping  hands  off  when  his  own  re-elections  were  pend 
ing;  and  it  may  be  doubted  whether  in  any  other  State 
a  United  States  Senator  through  so  many  years  ever 
succeeded  in  holding  his  seat  continuously  for  so  long  a 
time  with  less  attention  to  the  details  of  party  manage 
ment.  It  is  true  that  from  time  to  time  some  of  those 
who  looked  ahead  to  remote  contingencies  were  sus 
pected  of  quietly  laying  their  plans,  and  Mr.  Platt  had 
a  few  friends  at  home  who,  watching  developments  at 
close  range,  kept  him  fairly  well  informed  of  what  was 
going  on,  but  true  to  his  character,  throughout  his  long 
career,  he  would  not  permit  himself  to  be  seriously 
disturbed  by  unfavorable  rumors.  There  was  never  a 
time  from  the  hour  of  his  first  nomination  when  he 
would  not  have  accepted  with  philosophy  his  retirement 
from  public  life.  Once,  indeed,  he  was  on  the  point 
of  retiring  of  his  own  volition.  This  was  in  the  third 
year  of  his  service.  He  had  been  seriously  ill  and  had 
been  obliged  to  submit  to  an  operation ;  his  wife  was  an 
invalid,  and  his  financial  affairs  were  sadly  demoralized, 
as  a  result  of  debts  incurred  through  the  failure  of 
the  cutlery  enterprise  at  Meriden.  He  had  not  yet 
attained  to  a  position  of  great  influence  in  Washington, 
and  he  was  tormented  with  anxiety  as  to  whether  he 
could  bear  up  under  the  burden  of  expense.  He  wrote 
to  one  or  two  intimates  in  Meriden  telling  them  of  his 
wish  to  resign,  not  with  a  view,  apparently,  of  asking 
their  advice,  but  simply  that  they  might  be  forewarned 
of  what  was  to  come.  It  was  only  after  strong  urging 
from  them  that  he  was  induced  to  reconsider  his 
determination  and  continue  until  the  end  of  his  term. 
By  that  time  his  mood  had  undergone  a  change;  he 
had  become  more  firmly  grounded  in  his  position;  he 
was  assured  of  the  undivided  support  of  his  State, 


Connecticut's  First  Citizen  537 

and  he  accepted  with  gratitude  the  unanimous  nomina 
tion  which  the  Republican  caucus  gave  him.  Thence 
forward,  while  he  sometimes  expressed  a  longing  for  the 
freedom  and  easier  conditions  of  private  life,  he  realized 
that  he  had  found  his  life's  work  in  the  Senate.  In  1888, 
in  1892,  and  again  in  1896,  there  were  intimations  in 
influential  quarters  that  he  would  be  an  acceptable 
candidate  for  President,  but  he  did  not  let  himself  be 
deluded  into  considering  such  a  remote  contingency, 
any  more  than  he  was  tempted  by  the  bait  of  the  Vice- 
Presidency  which  was  also  dangled  before  his  eyes. 
In  1889,  while  he  was  serving  his  second  term,  the 
office  of  Chief -Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  Errors 
of  Connecticut  became  vacant  and  Governor  Bulkeley 
offered  him  the  place,  which  after  a  few  days'  con 
sideration  he  declined.1 

After  the  election  of  1890,  which  resulted  disastrously 
to  the  Republican  cause  throughout  the  United  States, 
it  was  found  that  the  Connecticut  Legislature  remained 
Republican  by  a  bare  majority.  As  Mr.  Platt's  second 
term  was  to  expire  on  March  4,  1891,  there  was  more 
or  less  conjecture  as  to  whether  his  chances  of  re 
election  would  be  affected  by  the  narrow  party  margin. 

1  His  letter  of  declination  to  Governor  Bulkeley  was  dated 
March  9,  1889: 

"When  in  Washington  recently  you  wished  to  know  whether  I 
would  entertain  favorably  the  suggestion  that  you  might  desire 
to  nominate  me  to  the  office  of  Chief- Justice  of  the  Supreme  Court 
of  Errors,  and  I  asked  a  few  days  in  which  to  consider  the  matter. 
I  have  given  the  matter  much  careful  thought,  and  my  conclusion 
is  that  it  would  be  unwise  to  accept  the  position;  and  in  this  deci 
sion  I  am  supported  by  the  opinion  of  the  few  friends  to  whom  I 
feel  at  liberty  to  speak. 

"I  assure  you  I  am  not  insensible  of  the  high  honor  which  would 
be  conferred  by  the  appointment,  and  I  shall  always  fully  appre 
ciate  the  compliment  of  being  thought  worthy  to  receive  it." 


538  Orville  H.  Platt 

There  was  nothing  very  definite  in  the  talk,  but  it 
attracted  the  attention  of  his  friends.  After  election 
he  went  to  Washington  for  a  few  days,  from  whence, 
in  the  excess  of  caution,  on  November  nth,  he  wrote 
to  John  R.  Buck: 

Before  I  came  away  I  heard  a  good  deal  of  talk  from 
Democratic  sources  to  the  effect  that  I  could  not  be  re- 
elected  in  this  Legislature.  Loomis,  who  makes  his  head 
quarters  at  the  Murray  Hill  Hotel,  said  so,  very  positively, 
to  General  Hawley.  I  saw  it  in  an  article  in  the  New 
Haven  Register,  and  a  number  of  Democrats  in  New  Haven 
have  said  in  a  mysterious  way  that  it  might  be  a  Republi 
can,  but  it  would  not  be  Platt.  Whether  there  is  enough 
of  this  smoke  to  indicate  a  fire  anywhere,  I  do  not  know. 
I  have  not  been  able  to  run  it  down  to  any  definite  conclu 
sion.  Some  say  that  there  are  Republicans  elected  who 
are  my  enemies  and  will  not  vote  for  me.  I  do  not  know  of 
any  such.  Others  say  that  the  liquor  dealers  control  cer 
tain  Republicans  in  the  Legislature,  and  that  they  do  not 
want  me.  Others  say  that  Sam  Fessenden  controls  a  few 
votes,  and  that  they  will  stand  out  till  the  rest  of  the 
party  goes  to  Fessenden.  I  am  satisfied  that  there  is 
nothing  to  this  latter  story. 

But  it  occurs  to  me  that  you,  being  intimate  with  Fred 
Brown  and  George  Sumner,  and  Cleveland,  might  find 
out  what  it  is  that  these  Democrats  appear  to  be  basing 
their  hopes  on.  Of  course,  the  situation — three  or  four 
or  six  majority — suggests  possibilities,  but  I  cannot 
discover  where  they  are  and  should  like  to  get  at  what 
it  is  the  Democrats  are  thinking  about. 

A  month  later,  on  December  8,  1890,  he  takes  up 
the  question  again  in  a  letter  to  Henry  T.  Blake  of 
New  Haven: 

You  speak  of  the  present  emergency  in  the  senatorial 
question.  There  is  none  as  far  as  I  am  concerned.  If  the 


Connecticut's  First  Citizen  539 

Republicans  in  the  Legislature  desire  some  other  person 
than  me  for  Senator,  there  will  be  no  more  happy  man  in 
the  State  than  I ;  and  if  any  Republicans  are  false  enough 
to  the  party  to  join  with  the  Democrats  in  determining 
who  the  Senator  shall  be,  it  will  trouble  other  Republicans 
in  the  State  a  great  deal  more  than  it  will  me.  I  am  weary 
of  the  life  here,  and  but  for  the  fact  that  the  unity  of  the 
party  depends  upon  my  being  a  candidate  for  re-election  I 
should  be  out  of  it. 

This  was  as  near  as  even  rumor  came  to  displacing 
Mr.  Platt  until  the  day  of  his  death,  save  only  on  one 
occasion.  But  it  was  inevitable  that  rumor  should 
once  in  a  while  suggest  possibilities.  That  he  was  not 
asleep  to  these  is  shown  in  a  letter  which  he  wrote  to 
Samuel  Fessenden  on  January  25,  1893: 

I  do  not  suppose  that  you  are  responsible  for  any  of 
the  statements  that  appear  in  newspapers  relating  to  the 
senatorship.  But  I  saw  in  the  Bridgeport  Farmer  an 
article  which  purports  to  be  an  expression  of  your  views 
by  one  of  your  most  intimate  friends,  in  which  he  says, 
after  speaking  of  the  fact  that  the  reason  for  your  re 
fusal  to  be  a  candidate  was  that  you  wanted  to  make  more 
money  before  you  became  one,  "that  four  years  from  now 
Senator  Platt 's  term  expires.  By  that  time  Mr.  Fessenden 
will  be  virtually  independent  of  a  Senator's  salary.  I  know 
as  an  absolute  fact  that  Senator  Platt  is  pledged  to  him, 
and,  if  the  Legislature  is  at  that  time  Republican,  Sam 
Fessenden  will  be  next  Senator  from  this  State."  Of 
course,  it  is  unnecessary  for  me  to  say  that  I  have  made  no 
pledges  whatever,  but  I  do  not  wish  to  let  a  statement  of 
that  sort,  which  comes  under  my  observation,  go  without 
any  notice  from  me.  It  is  better  to  speak  of  it  when  I  see 
it  than  to  leave  any  opportunity  for  misunderstandings 
in  the  future. 


540  Orville  H.  Platt 

It  was  during  this  period  of  his  career  that  he  was 
called  upon  to  make  a  decision  which  he  believed  would 
have  an  important  effect  upon  his  political  future.  The 
Democratic  majority  in  the  Senate  had  been  wiped  out 
by  the  elections  of  1894  and  the  Senate  was  to  be 
reorganized  on  a  Republican  basis  in  the  session  of 
1895-6.  Senator  Manderson  of  Nebraska  who  had  been 
President  pro  tern  prior  to  the  period  of  Democratic 
supremacy  was  about  to  leave  public  life  and  it  was 
necessary  to  make  a  new  selection.  The  names  con 
sidered  for  the  place  were  those  of  three  New  England 
veterans:  Platt,  Hoar,  and  Frye.  Had  the  Connecticut 
Senator  cared  for  the  position  he  would  undoubtedly 
have  been  chosen,  as  he  was  regarded  with  especial 
favor  by  the  western  men  who  held  the  balance  of 
power;  but,  while  the  office  carried  a  certain  prestige, 
his  ambition  did  not  lie  that  way.  He  was  in  line  for 
the  Finance  Committee — a  designation  which  it  might 
require  some  effort  to  secure,  but  which  would  give  him 
the  opportunity  to  participate  in  framing  a  protective 
tariff  in  the  event  of  complete  Republican  success  the 
following  year.  On  June  24,  1895,  he  wrote  from 
Meriden  to  John  H.  Flagg: 

I  note  what  you  say  about  being  elected  President 
pro  tempore  of  the  Senate,  but  I  think  you  have  forgotten 
what  I  want,  and  that  is  to  go  on  the  Finance  Committee. 
I  should  care  nothing  for  being  President  pro  tempore,  but 
should  care  very  much  for  a  place  on  the  Finance  Committee. 
I  know  I  could  easily  be  elected  President  pro  tempore, 
and  I  know  I  cannot  easily  get  on  the  Finance  Committee. 
The  people  of  the  State  of  Connecticut  would  take  no  in 
terest  or  very  little  interest  in  my  getting  the  former,  but 
would  see  the  necessity  of  continuing  me  in  the  Senate  if 
I  could  get  the  latter.  Dubois  and  Hansbrough  and  Petti- 


Connecticut's  First  Citizen  541 

grew  want  to  get  rid  of  me  on  the  Indian  and  Territorial 
Committees.  Hence  their  willingness  and  anxiety  to 
make  me  President  pro  tempore,  but  I  have  told  them  what 
I  want,  and  though  they  are  silver  men,  they  are  disposed  to 
help  me  on  to  the  Finance  Committee.  They  love  me  well 
enough,  perhaps,  but  what  they  want  is  a  clear  track  for 
Pettigrew  to  be  Chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Indian  Affairs , 
Hansbrough  Chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Territories,  and 
Dubois  Chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Public  Lands,  which 
he  can  have  if  Pettigrew  gets  the  Chairmanship  of  Indian 
Affairs.  This  is  the  situation,  and  I  am  inclined  to  think 
it  is  such  that  I  may  get  the  Finance  Committee,  although 
it  would  make  three  on  it  from  New  England.  At  any 
rate  I  don't  want  to  be  President  pro  tempore  in  any  event. 

He  adhered  to  this  determination,  even  though  other 
Republican  Senators  assured  him  that  they  saw  no 
reason  why  he  should  not  have  both  places. 


CHAPTER  XLII 

THE  FESSENDEN  EPISODE 

An  Evanescent  Disturbance — Proposed  for  Vice-President — Refuses 

to  Make  a  Personal  Canvass  for  Re-election — Election 

in  1897 — Political  Expenditures. 

HOWEVER  little  temptation  there  may  have  been 
in  the  proposal  to  make  him  President  pro  tern, 
Mr.  Platt  was  up  against  a  somewhat  more  serious 
embarrassment  in  1896,  through  a  suggestion  that  he 
be  placed  on  the  ticket  with  McKinley  in  the  event  of 
McKinley's  nomination  for  President.  No  public  man 
was  ever  more  free  from  the  weaknesses  of  political 
ambition,  and  therefore  no  man  was  ever  less  likely  to 
be  beguiled  by  intimations  which  to  others  might  have 
proved  seductive.  He  never  cherished  the  slightest 
inclination  toward  the  vice-presidency,  and  so  there 
wras  no  taint  of  personal  vanity  to  interfere  with  a 
clear  perception  of  the  motives  underlying  the  sugges 
tion  of  his  name.  He  recognized  it  first  as  a  part  of 
the  tactics  of  the  friends  of  Mr.  McKinley  to  weaken 
the  support  of  Mr.  Reed  in  New  England,  and  second 
as  a  clever  diversion  for  the  politicians  of  his  own 
State  who  would  have  welcomed  the  vacant  Senate 
seat  resulting  from  so  distinguished  a  compliment.  It 
happened  that  this  mild  exploitation  of  the  chances  for 
a  Connecticut  vice-president  was  coincident  with  the 
only  tangible  movement  which  was  ever  made  within 

542 


The  Fessenden  Episode  543 

the  party  in  behalf  of  another  aspirant  for  Mr.  Platt's 
seat  in  the  Senate — a  movement  which  was  doomed  to 
a  brief  existence  but  which  while  it  continued  caused 
considerable  annoyance.  It  was  the  only  time  in  his 
career  when  the  Senator  came  to  the  point  of  seriously 
considering  an  organization  among  his  friends  to  safe 
guard  his  political  interests.  The  State  Convention 
to  select  delegates  to  the  Republican  National  Conven 
tion  was  held  in  the  spring  of  1896,  and  Mr.  Platt's 
third  term  as  Senator  was  to  expire  on  March  4,  1897. 
Even  before  the  meeting  of  the  spring  convention,  there 
began  to  spread  an  understanding  that  Samuel  Fessen 
den,  the  Connecticut  member  of  the  Republican 
National  Committee,  would  be  a  formidable  factor 
in  an  approaching  contest  for  the  senatorship.  Mr. 
Fessenden  was  entrusted  with  the  management  of 
Reed's  canvass  in  Connecticut.  Mr.  Platt,  while  per 
sonally  inclined  toward  Reed,  had  scrupulously  re 
frained,  according  to  his  custom,  from  influencing  the 
choice  of  delegates.  John  Addison  Porter,  afterwards 
the  President's  secretary,  through  his  newspaper,  the 
Hartford  Post,  was  ardently  urging  the  nomination  of 
McKinley.  The  question  of  the  presidency  was  in 
volved  in  a  measure  with  that  of  the  senatorship. 
Through  the  winter  intimations  of  the  activity  of 
Fessenden's  supporters  kept  coming  to  Platt.  He 
began  at  last  to  show  signs  of  interest.  On  March 
16,  1896  he  wrote  to  H.  Wales  Lines: 

I  hear  of  a  good  many  places  in  which  Mr.  Fessenden's 
friends  are  trying  to  select  candidates  to  be  nominated 
for  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives.  ...  It  is  a 
little  difficult  to  know  just  what  I  ought  to  be  doing  or  my 
friends  for  me,  in  view  of  the  aggressive  work  which  the 
Fessenden  men  have  taken  up.  I  do  not  think  they 


544  Orville  H.  Platt 

are  meeting  with  the  encouragement  which  they  expected, 
and  yet  they  are  ploughing  around  as  best  they  can.  There 
is  a  meeting  of  the  State  Committee  next  Wednesday  even 
ing,  I  think,  to  determine  when  the  convention  to  nominate 
delegates  to  St.  Louis  is  to  be  held  in  Connecticut.  I  should 
like  to  be  a  mouse  in  the  wall  at  that  meeting,  for  I  think 
there  will  be  indications  of  what  the  crowd  think  of  the 
situation. 

Early  in  February  we  find  him  writing  to  his  old 
friend,  John  R.  Buck  of  Hartford1 

I  judge  that  the  political  pot  boils  a  little  more  than 
of  late  in  Connecticut  on  account  of  the  selection  of  dele 
gates  to  St.  Louis.  I  am  not  trying  to  nominate  a  Presi 
dent,  and  if  I  were  a  delegate  to  the  convention,  I  do  not 
know  at  this  moment  what  I  would  do.  But  I  do  hear 
various  rumors  of  an  effort  on  the  part  of  Fessenden  to 
control  the  selection  of  delegates  and  to  be  able  to  cast 
the  vote  of  Connecticut  in  conjunction  with  that  of  New 
York  and  Pennsylvania  under  the  lead  of  Platt  and  Quay. 
I  don't  place  much  dependence  on  that,  for  I  don't  believe 
that  any  one  can  name  delegates  in  Connecticut  and  get 
them.  But  as  I  say,  I  am  not  mixing  or  meddling  with 
this  matter. 

With  all  the  spread  of  rumor  and  suspicion  he  did  not 
feel  free  to  absent  himself  from  Washington  during 
the  session  of  Congress,  and  besides  he  had  certain 
scruples  against  even  an  appearance  of  canvassing  for 
his  own  re-election.  To  an  invitation  to  speak  at 
Danbury  he  responded  on  March  i2th,  in  a  letter  to 
C.  H.  Merritt  of  that  town: 

I  don't  want  to  come  to  Danbury  in  a  way  in  which 
any  one  could  say  that  I  was  electioneering  for  myself.  I 
can't  do  that.  I  never  have  and  I  am  not  going  to  begin 


The  Fessenden  Episode  545 

now.  Just  the  way  I  feel  about  the  matter  of  re-election 
is  this.  If  the  people  of  the  State,  by  which  I  mean  the 
Republican  people,  want  me  to  serve  another  term  I  shall 
be  very  thankful  and  glad.  If  they  want  some  one  else 
rather  than  me,  I  should  try  to  accept  their  verdict  as 
philosophically  as  might  be.  My  own  belief  about  it  is, 
and  I  think  I  may  say  so  without  being  charged  with  ego 
tism,  that  a  very  large  proportion  of  the  Republican  voters  in 
Connecticut  wish  me  to  be  returned.  If  that  is  so,  I  want 
their  wishes  to  find  expression  and  not  to  be  thwarted  by 
any  kind  of  political  wire-pulling.  I  feel  a  certain  degree 
of  assurance  that  if  the  people  who  want  me  to  come  back 
take  sufficient  interest  in  it  to  let  their  wishes  be  reflected 
in  the  election  of  members  of  the  Legislature,  there  will  not 
be  much  of  a  contest.  The  only  thing  that  I  fear  is  that 
they  may  feel  as  if  there  was  no  occasion  to  do  or  say  very 
much,  expecting  the  matter  will  come  out  all  right  anyway. 
I  can't  make  a  personal  campaign  of  it.  I  must  do  the  best 
I  can  here  and  elsewhere  for  the  party  and  State  and  leave 
the  matter  pretty  much  to  the  people  to  say  what  they 
want.  If  I  do  this  I  shall  meet  the  result  with  a  feeling  of 
self-respect  which  I  should  not  have  if  I  went  into  a  political 
scramble  in  the  State  to  secure  the  nomination  and  election 
of  representatives  who  were  favorable  to  me.  I  think  you 
can  appreciate  my  feelings  in  this  respect. 

A  few  days  later  he  wrote  to  John  H.  Flagg: 

Mr.  Fessenden's  particular  friends  are  beginning  to 
inaugurate  quite  an  active  campaign,  laying  plans  already 
to  nominate  in  the  different  towns  and  senatorial  districts 
men  upon  whom  they  think  they  can  rely  to  be  friendly  to 
Mr.  Fessenden,  and  I  suppose  that  at  present  there  is 
nothing  for  me  to  do  but  to  let  that  sort  of  thing  go  on.  I 
can't  stop  it,  and  I  know  of  no  way  to  meet  it  actively. 
If  the  sentiment  in  my  favor  is  really  earnest  and  pro 
nounced,  it  seems  as  if  it  would  assert  itself  in  caucuses  and 

35 


546  Orville  H.  Platt 

conventions,  and  bring  the  Fessenden  plans  to  naught. 
If  it  is  a  languid  feeling  or  kind  of  limited  endorsement 
sort  of  a  thing,  the  active  wire-pulling  may  overcome  it. 
At  any  rate  I  can  only  sit  by  and  watch  and  wait.  ...  I 
have  settled  down  to  the  conviction  and  conclusion  that 
from  now  on  until  the  question  comes  of  my  election  in 
the  Legislature  it  will  be  the  same  thing.  No  active  organi 
zation  in  my  behalf,  a  very  active  organization  on  the  part 
of  Mr.  Fessenden  and  his  friends,  the  whole  thing  depend 
ing  on  whether  they  can  override  public  sentiment  or  not. 

That  he  was  watching  closely  the  developments  of 
affairs  at  home,  however,  is  shown  by  his  corre 
spondence.  To  John  R.  Buck  of  Hartford  he  wrote, 
on  March  i6th,  a  letter  which  betrayed  an  intelligent 
understanding  of  the  drift: 

I  am  anxious  to  know  whether  you  yourself  want  to 
go  to  the  St.  Louis  Convention.  If  you  do,  I  want  to 
have  you,  though  I  don't  know  anything  what  your  views 
are  about  who  ought  to  be  nominated,  but  it  would  not 
make  any  difference  if  I  did,  because  I  do  want  some  one 
to  go  to  the  Convention  from  Connecticut  who  will  have 
as  much  influence  and  strength  with  the  delegation 
as  you  would  be  sure  to  have.  I  don't  want  the  enemy, 
Fessenden,  that  is,  to  have  complete  control  of  the  Con 
necticut  vote  at  St.  Louis.  Not  that  I  think  he  is  going 
to  have,  but  I  cannot  bear  this  talk  that  Quay  controls 
the  vote  of  Pennsylvania,  Platt  controls  the  vote  of  New 
York,  and  Fessenden  controls  the  vote  of  Connecticut.  I 
see  it  more  and  more  until  I  am  sick  at  heart,  and  am  not 
really  in  condition  to  swear  very  much  about  it.  I  know 
just  as  well  as  I  know  anything  that,  unless  Reed  can 
make  the  nomination,  there  will  be  an  attempt  made  by 
Fessenden  to  bring  me  out  for  the  vice-presidency.  No 
one  knows  how  this  nomination  is  going  to  turn,  but  if 
it  does  go  to  a  western  man,  he  will  try  to  play  that  game, 


The  Fessenden  Episode  547 

and  his  relations  with  Platt  and  Quay  are  close  enough  to 
make  it  dangerous.  I  want  some  one  in  that  delegation 
who  can  speak  for  me  and  speak  loud  if  occasion  demands  it. 
I  find  that  the  Fessenden  pushers  are  pretty  vigor 
ous  and  somewhat  aggressive  but  are  meeting  with  rebuff 
and  refusal  in  quarters  they  did  not  expect.  ...  You 
know  how  philosophically  I  am  sitting  here  and  how 
philosophically  I  will  sit  by  my  hearthstone  in  the  Adiron- 
dacks  if  I  can  get  away  from  here.  Still  I  like  to  hear 
what  is  going  on. 

It  was  at  this  stage  of  the  proceedings  that  the  Hart 
ford  Post  published  an  editorial  voicing  the  casual 
expressions  through  the  State  that  Mr.  Platt  would 
make  an  admirable  Vice- President  and  calling  upon  the 
Republicans  of  Connecticut  to  work  to  that  end.  Mr. 
Platt  perceived  immediately  the  real  purpose  of  the 
proposal.  He  wrote  to  his  son  James  on  March  3oth, 
enclosing  the  editorial : 

Did  you  see  this?  The  question  is  what  to  do  about 
it — how  it  can  best  be  nipped  in  the  bud.  I  think  you  can 
tell  Tom  Warnock  to  say  something  in  his  paper  to-morrow 
to  the  effect  that  I  would  not  be  a  candidate  for  Vice-Presi 
dent  under  any  circumstances  and  that  the  Republicans 
of  the  State  are  not  to  be  diverted  from  their  determination 
to  run  me  for  the  Senate  by  any  such  suggestion.  That 
is  about  the  way  I  think  I  should  put  it,  but  you  will  be 
the  judge.  There  is  a  lot  of  that  thing  going  on  around  the 
State.  I  cannot  deny  it  by  saying  to  the  New  York 
papers,  to  the  Courant,  and  other  such  papers  that  I  am 
hot  and  will  not  be  a  candidate,  but  you  can  say  it. 

The  Hartford  Courant  promptly  responded  to  the 
editorial  of  the  Post,  and  other  newspapers  also  handled 
the  question  in  the  same  way.  To  Charles  Hopkins 


548  Orville  H.  Platt 

Clark,  editor  of  the  Courant,  Mr.  Platt  wrote  on  March 
3ist: 

I  am  very  much  obliged  for  the  article  in  the  Courant 
of  yesterday  morning  and  for  the  way  in  which  you  treated 
the  embarrassing  suggestion  of  the  Post.  I  have  been 
aware  of  a  proposed  movement  to  bring  me  out  as  a  candi 
date  for  Vice-President  for  some  time,  but  thought  that  it 
would  probably  come  at  the  time  of  the  convention  in  case 
a  western  man  should  be  nominated. 

Two  classes  of  people  have  been  at  work  at  it:  The 
Fessenden  men,  in  his  interest  solely,  and  the  McKinley 
men,  with  the  idea  that  it  might  help  to  get  a  McKinley 
delegation.  An  embarrassing  feature  of  it  has  been  that 
so  many  of  my  warm  friends  look  at  it  as  if  such  a  possibility 
would  confer  additional  honor  upon  me. 

I  think  you  treated  the  matter  admirably,  and  I  want  you 
to  know  how  much  I  appreciate  it. 

On  the  same  day  he  wrote  to  H.  Wales  Lines, 
going  a  little  more  closely  into  the  political  history 
of  the  day : 

From  this  distance  I  can't  see  whether  things  are  working 
well  or  ill  for  me.  This  Vice-President  business  has  been 
a  very  shrewdly  contrived  idea  for  some  time,  and  has 
been  worked  for  all  it  is  worth.  ...  Of  course  it  is  en 
gineered  by  the  Fessenden  men,  and  Porter's  object  in  it 
was  not  so  much  to  help  Fessenden  as  to  help  McKinley, 
and  the  unpleasant  thing  about  it,  after  all,  is  that  a  good 
many  people  who  are  good  friends  of  mine  can't  understand 
but  that  it  would  be  a  very  welcome  thing  to  me  if  I  could 
be  nominated  for  Vice-President.  That  is  the  matter 
which  has  troubled  me.  I  have  had  to  talk  and  write  to 
people  who  are  almost  as  enthusiastic  friends  of  mine  as  you 
are  to  convince  them  that  it  would  not  be  a  great  thing  if  I 
could  be  nominated  for  that  office.  The  Hartford  Post 


The  Fessenden  Episode  549 

article  embarrasses  me  pretty  badly  here.  .  .  .  Reed 
understands  Fessenden  and  his  movements  pretty  well. 
But  at  the  same  time  he  became  very  much  alarmed  and 
did  not  understand  how  such  a  thing  could  be  done  without 
my  consent.  He  wanted  me  to  say,  myself,  through  the 
newspapers  that  I  was  not  a  candidate  for  Vice-President, 
and  that  I  wanted  to  be  returned  to  the  Senate  and  that 
was  all  I  wanted.  Charlie  Russell  thought  I  had  better  do 
it  for  the  reason  that  while  eastern  Connecticut  is  solid  for 
me  this  talk  about  nominating  me  for  Vice-President  had 
gone  through  that  section  of  the  State  and  that  even  my 
friends  thought  it  would  be  a  great  thing.  I  telegraphed 
James  yesterday  to  know  what  he  thought  about  it,  and 
he  said  No,  which  was  my  judgment  all  the  while  as  I  told 
Russell.  ...  It  would  seem  as  if  the  performance  was 
pretty  thoroughly  exposed.  At  the  same  time  you  can 
see  how  nervous  Reed  would  be  and  is,  and  it  is  not  easy 
to  satisfy  him  that  I  ought  not  to  say  something  myself. 

To  Charles  W.  Pickett,  an  editor  of  the  New  Haven 
Leader,  he  wrote  on  April  i,  1896: 

Of  course  you  know  just  how  I  feel  about  the  senatorship. 
If  the  people  of  Connecticut  are  willing  to  do  me  further 
honor  I  hope  they  will  re-elect  me  Senator.  That  would 
be  very  gratifying  to  me.  I  do  not  desire  any  other  office. 
I  have  made  no  personal  effort  looking  toward  a  re-election. 
I  must  leave  that  to  the  judgment  of  the  Republicans  of 
Connecticut.  It  may  possibly  seem  singular  to  you,  but  I 
should  not  respect  myself  if  I  attempted  to  make  a  cam 
paign  organization  for  the  purpose  of  securing  a  re-election. 
I  was  reading  only  last  evening  the  biography  of  a  public 
man  of  whom  the  author  said:  "He  never  condescended  to 
the  despicable  pursuit  of  self-advertisement,"  and  I  thought 
that  I  would  rather  have  that  said  of  me  when  I  am  gone 
than  to  secure  any  public  honor  by  resorting  to  the  methods 
and  means  which  politicians  sometimes  adopt  to  secure 


550  Orville  H.  Platt 

success.  I  don't  mean  by  this  that  I  don't  appreciate 
everything  that  is  said  or  done  in  my  behalf  by  those  who 
think  that  I  ought  to  be  re-elected.  I  assure  you  that  I 
do  appreciate  such  support  more  perhaps  than  a  man  would 
who  was  trying  to  re-elect  himself. 

With  regard  to  Mr.  Fessenden  I  have  no  quarrel  with 
him,  nor  indeed,  a  controversy.  I  have  been  pleased  in 
that  so  far  as  the  matter  has  been  talked  about  I  have  not 
heard  that  he  or  his  friends  have  said  any  unkind  things 
about  me.  And  I  certainly  would  have  no  feeling  of  un- 
kindness  towards  him  or  towards  those  who  would  like 
to  advance  his  interests.  I  have  never  quite  thought  that 
he  was  dead  in  earnest  about  desiring  to  secure  the  place 
I  now  occupy.  Some  things  made  me  think  that  his 
present  ambition  lies  rather  in  another  direction. 

The  canvass  was  not  altogether  free  from  personal 
criticism.  One  report  had  it  that  Mr.  Platt  was  guilty 
of  nepotism,  and  that  he  had  used  his  position  to  secure 
the  appointment  of  relatives  and  personal  friends  to 
office.  To  a  New  Britain  correspondent  who  informed 
him  of  this  report,  he  wrote  on  April  pth : 

A  man  must  be  pretty  hard  pushed  to  make  the  objec 
tion  to  me  that  I  put  relatives  or  even  friends  in  office. 
So  far  as  I  know  there  is  but  one  person  in  office  in  the 
United  States  who  is  a  relative  of  mine.  The  enrolling 
clerk  of  the  Senate  is  a  second  cousin,  but  was  appointed 
specially  on  the  ground  of  his  capacity  for  that  particular 
place,  upon  the  recommendation  of  the  Senators  from  New 
York,  he  being  a  resident  of  Albany.  I  think  that  I  can 
say  that  I  have  never  recommended  the  appointment  of 
a  man  to  office  from  whose  appointment  I  expected  to 
derive  the  slightest  personal  advantage.  I  am  making  and 
shall  make  no  canvass  or  contest  to  be  returned  to  the 
Senate  again,  yet  I  confess  I  should  like  to  be.  It  would  be 
extremely  gratifying  to  me  to  have  another  term,  but  the 


The  Fessenden  Episode  551 

matter  must  take  care  of  itself.  ...  I  could  not  respect 
myself  if  I  resorted  to  the  methods  so  common  at  the  pre 
sent  day  to  secure  re-election.  .  .  .  Taking  the  State  by 
and  large,  I  think  that  there  is  quite  a  decided  feeling  that 
I  ought  to  be  returned.  If  such  should  be  the  result,  I 
should  be,  as  I  have  said,  very  thankful.  If  not  I  shall 
try  to  acquiesce  with  what  philosophy  I  may  be  able  to 
muster. 

The  sentiment  for  Platt's  return  was  so  pronounced 
that  the  Fessenden  agitation  subsided  rapidly  after  the 
meeting  of  the  State  Convention,  and  by  the  end  of 
May  there  was  so  little  anxiety  among  Mr.  Platt's 
friends,  that  he  had  begun  to  regard  the  earlier  rumors 
as  exaggerations.  In  the  last  week  of  May,  writing  to 
his  friend,  John  Coe,  who  was  having  an  outing  in 
London,  he  said  he  was  not  worrying  about  it.  "If 
they  don't  send  me  back  here,  you  and  I  will  set  up  a 
partnership  and  see  how  well  we  can  enjoy  ourselves, 
and  I  should  like  that  quite  as  well  as  being  in  the 
Senate." 

But  there  was  never  really  any  cause  for  any  one  to 
worry.  As  soon  as  it  became  known  that  another 
name  had  been  suggested  there  was  such  an  expression 
of  opinion  in  favor  of  continuing  him  in  the  service 
that  all  doubt  of  the  choice  of  the  State  was  removed 
on  the  spot.  Mr.  Fessenden  was  informed  pointedly 
that  he  had  better  get  out  of  the  way,  and  he  con 
cluded  to  defer  his  ambitions  till  a  more  favorable 
opportunity.  In  July  the  Senator  wrote  to  Isaac  H. 
Bromley  of  the  New  York  Tribune: 

The  whole  situation  seems  to  have  been  absolutely 
cleared  up  and  every  one,  even  Mr.  Fessenden's  friends,  to 
be  happy  over  the  prospect  of  my  return  to  the  Senate 


552  Orville  H.  Platt 

without  opposition.  That  it  is  gratifying  to  me  goes 
without  saying,  though  I  realize  the  fact  that  when  the 
years  creep  on  a  man  as  on  you  and  me  the  natural  thing 
is  for  the  procession  to  pass  by;  but  I  hope  that  I  may 
have  vigor  and  strength  both  of  body  and  mind  to  do 
effective  work  for  some  years  to  come. 

When  the  Legislature  convened  in  the  following 
January,  Mr.  Platt  was  renominated  as  usual  by  ac 
clamation,  and  duly  elected  without  the  expenditure 
of  effort  or  money.1 

1  In  January,  1897,  Senator  Platt  made  the  following  affidavit 
of  expenses  incurred  by  him:  "  The  undersigned,  Orville  H.  Platt  of 
Meriden,  Connecticut,  having  been  on  Wednesday,  January  20, 
1897,  declared  elected  to  the  Senate  of  the  United  States  from  the 
State  of  Connecticut,  for  the  term  of  six  years,  commencing  March 
4,  1897,  makes  this  affidavit  in  compliance  with  Section  2  of  the 
act  entitled:  'An  act  to  punish  corrupt  practices  at  elections,' 
approved  July  ninth,  eighteen  hundred  and  ninety -five.  Whether 
the  section  in  question  requires  a  statement  giving  the  disburse 
ments,  expenses,  and  contributions  in  the  campaign  resulting  in 
the  election  of  Senators  and  Representatives,  the  undersigned  is  in 
doubt  and  therefore  covers  both  periods. 

"During  the  campaign  resulting  in  the  election  of  Senators  and 
Representatives  to  the  Legislature  I  was  under  no  expense,  made 
no  disbursements  or  contributions,  except  that  as  I  was  engaged 
in  delivering  addresses  in  different  parts  of  the  State  I  paid  my 
personal  expenses  in  travelling  and  staying  at  hotels.  Of  these 
expenses  I  kept  no  memorandum  and  can  only  say  that  they  did 
not  exceed  the  sum  of  one  hundred  dollars  ($100.00).  I  have 
been  at  no  expense,  have  made  no  disbursements  or  contributions 
whatever  since  the  election  of  Senators  and  Representatives  up  to 
and  including  the  time  of  my  election. 

"Dated  at  Washington,  D.  C.,  January  27,  1897." 

It  could  never  be  truthfully  charged  that  Mr.  Platt' s  successive 
elections  to  the  Senate  were  accompanied  with  an  undue  expendi 
ture  of  money.  It  is  doubtful  whether  from  first  to  last  the 
entire  cost  was  as  much  as  might  reasonably  be  expended  in  a  single 
campaign  for  a  minor  elective  office.  After  the  election  of  1903, 
H.  Wales  Lines  who  had  in  charge  the  finances  of  the  original 
canvass  in  1879,  wrote  him: 

Recently  I  found  some  memorandums  which  I  made  in  January 


The  Fessenden  Episode  553 

His  most  memorable  service  was  yet  to  come. 

1879,  from  which  I  pick  out  a  few  that  may  be  of  interest.  I  find 
there  a  record  of  a  cash  contribution  by  Charles  Parker  of  $200 
and  I.  C.  Lewis  of  $225  for  expenses  of  the  canvass;  besides  a 
memorandum  of  a  number  of  different  men  who  paid  their  own 
expenses  as  they  went  to  other  towns  seeking  to  interest  men  in 
the  support  of  you  for  Senator.  One  of  the  items  of  expense  seems 
to  have  been  $2  for  the  rent  of  Armory  Hall  for  a  reception.  Re 
ceptions  cost  more  nowadays.  I  think  this  must  have  been  held 
with  no  cards,  no  music,  and  no  flowers. " 

When  his  name  was  first  brought  forward  in  1878,  a  friend  in 
a  distant  State  wrote  offering  financial  aid,  only  to  receive  the 
reply:  "Don't  care  for  a  cent  from  anybody.  If  I  am  elected  it 
will  be  because  I  am  wanted." 


CHAPTER  XLIII 
A  STATE'S  CROWNING  TRIBUTE 

Election   in  1903 — Address  to   Legislature — A   Senator's   Duty — 
Reception  by  the  State  at  Hartford. 

COMING  at  the  close  of  six  historic  years,  Senator 
Platt's  entrance  upon  a  fifth  successive  term  was 
like  a  coronation.  For  the  first  time  Connecticut  had 
the  opportunity  to  pay  so  striking  a  compliment  to  one 
of  her  sons,  and  the  people  whose  credit  he  had  held 
high  in  Washington  for  a  quarter  of  a  century  vied  in 
doing  honor.  Valuable  as  his  service  had  been  hither 
to  he  had  not  yet  come  before  them  clothed  with  so 
much  distinction,  for  the  term  just  coming  to  an  end 
had  given  him  a  prestige  which  had  attached  to  no 
other  Connecticut  representative  in  the  nation's  councils 
since  the  day  of  Roger  Sherman.  The  election  itself 
was  a  matter  of  form.  The  Republican  caucus  as  usual 
made  the  nomination  by  acclamation,  and  the  General 
Assembly  went  through  the  required  ceremony  of  a 
ballot  in  which  Mr.  Platt  received  169  out  of  170  Re 
publican  votes,  a  tobacco  farmer  from  Barkhamsted 
happily  selecting  this  opportunity  to  express  his  dis 
satisfaction  with  the  course  of  the  Senator  with  regard 
to  Cuban  reciprocity. 

Mr.  Platt  was  in  Hartford,  having  come  on  from 
Washington  on  the  announcement  of  his  nomination, 
and  after  the  ballot  had  been  declared  he  appeared 

554 


A  State's  Crowning  Tribute  555 

before  the  joint  convention  which  rose  to  greet  him, 
remaining  standing  until  he  had  taken  his  seat.  He 
was  deeply  moved  as  he  began  to  speak: 

I  desire  through  you  Mr.  President,  Mr.  Speaker,  and 
you  gentlemen  who  constitute  the  General  Assembly,  to  say 
to  the  people  of  Connecticut  in  homely,  heartfelt,  Anglo- 
Saxon  phrase,  I  thank  you.  Through  these  words  the 
heart  speaks  as  it  can  through  no  other.  No  adjective  can 
add  to  their  meaning,  no  other  words  can  be  more  expres 
sive  of  my  emotion.  If  repetition  could  emphasize  them,  I 
would  say  again  and  again — I  thank  you. 

He  spoke  of  the  twenty-four  years  during  which  he  had 
been  a  representative  of  the  State  of  Connecticut  in  the 
Senate  of  the  United  States,  a  period  covering  years 
of  such  marvellous  national  progress  and  development 
''that  we  may  without  boasting,  say  that  the  body 
of  which  you  have  constituted  me  a  member  surpasses 
in  dignity,  in  responsibility,  and  in  its  influence  upon  the 
destinies  of  mankind,  any  legislative  body  in  the  world." 
He  did  not  attribute  his  great  honor  solely  to  any 
personal  achievement.  He  believed  that  in  the  en 
joyment  of  this  long  continued  confidence  he  had  been 
favored  by  conditions  and  circumstances  which  had  not 
so  favorably  affected  his  predecessors.  He  had  followed 
in  the  footsteps  of  able,  forceful,  and  great  Senators 
whose  term  of  service  had  been  shortened  by  death  or 
changed  political  conditions,  Senators  who  had  made 
a  State  of  limited  area  and  resources  respected  and 
potential  in  national  affairs,  men  who  had  thought 
deeply  on  problems  of  government,  who  more  than  any 
others  laid  the  foundations  upon  which  a  noble  and 
enduring  structure  had  been  built,  who  had  been 
exemplars  and  models  for  those  who  followed  them: 


556  Orville  H.  Platt 

To  have  followed  such  men,  to  have  served  the  State 
in  such  a  capacity  now  for  twenty-four  years,  is  an  honor 
which  I  cherish  above  every  other  honor,  and  above  all 
other  possessions.  If  I  have  been  ambitious,  it  fully 
fills  the  measure  of  that  ambition,  and  to  have  been  chosen 
for  a  further  service  of  six  years  is  an  honor  which  far  ex 
ceeds  that  ambition  and  places  me  under  obligations  which 
I  hope  I  realize,  but  which  I  fear  I  may  be  unable  to  fully 
discharge. 

He  dwelt  upon  what  he  believed  to  be  the  true 
conception  of  a  Senator's  duty  to  his  State: 

A  Senator  in  the  Congress  of  the  United  States  must  be 
more  than  a  mere  representative  of  his  State.  States,  like 
individuals,  have  their  immediate  rights  and  interests,  but, 
like  individuals,  these  rights  and  interests  are  of  necessity 
limited  by  the  welfare  of  the  whole  body  politic,  and  the 
welfare  and  greater  interests  of  the  whole  nation  must  be 
subserved  as  well  as  the  interests  and  welfare  of  a  particular 
State.  It  is  by  no  means  easy  to  draw  the  line  of  action 
between  what  seems  to  be  for  the  advancement  of  a  State 
and  what  seems  to  be  for  the  advancement  of  the  whole 
nation,  but  of  this  I  am  sure,  that  what  is  really  and  truly 
for  the  best  good  of  the  nation  is  most  truly  for  the  interest 
of  a  single  constituent  State.  If  the  interest  of  the  State 
clashes  with  the  interest  of  the  United  States,  its  pro 
gress  and  development  will  be  best  subserved  by  not  insist 
ing  too  vigorously  upon  its  supposed  rights.  I  regard  that 
phrase  in  the  preamble  of  our  Constitution  in  which  one  of 
the  objects  of  its  adoption  is  said  to  be  the  promotion  of 
the  general  welfare  as  the  keynote  of  that  Constitution,  and 
thus  while  a  Senator  should  never  lose  sight  of  the  interests 
of  the  State  which  he  represents,  he  should  always  have  in 
view  the  welfare,  happiness,  and  the  best  interests  of  that 
great  body  of  American  citizens  which  constitutes  the 
strength  and  glory  of  our  nation.  The  individual  must 


A  State's  Crowning  Tribute  557 

sometimes  forego  the  assertion  of  what  he  deems  to  be 
peculiarly  his  own  right  for  the  greater  benefit  of  the  society 
of  which  he  is  a  part.  A  State  must  sometimes  forego  the 
assertion  of  its  immediate  right  in  order  that  the  rights  of 
all  the  States  as  they  constitute  the  nation  shall  be  regarded. 
A  true  representative,  whether  in  the  State  Legislature 
or  in  the  National  Legislature,  will  represent  to  the  best  of 
his  ability  the  views  of  the  constituency  which  elected  him, 
and  if  he  cannot  gain  the  assent  of  the  great  body  of 
representatives  to  his  views  he  will  gracefully  and  cheer 
fully  surrender  them  to  the  views  of  the  majority.  The 
majority  must  rule. 

His  closing  words  were  scriptural  in  their  exalted 
dignity: 

As  I  came  to  this  Capitol,  I  looked  up  and  saw  flying 
over  it,  side  by  side  with  the  national  flag,  the  flag  of  our 
own  loved  State,  and  as  I  saw  the  three  fruitful  vines  and 
read  its  old  Latin  motto  I  felt  that  more  than  in  any  other 
State,  the  armorial  bearings  of  the  flag  proclaimed  the  faith 
of  the  fathers  and  still  represented  the  faith  of  their  de 
scendants.  If  the  fruited  vines  refer,  as  has  been  surmised, 
to  the  three  original  towns  of  Hartford,  Windsor,  and 
Wethersfield,  as  vines  of  the  Lord's  own  planting,  the  faith 
which  inscribed  them  on  our  shield  and  our  flag  has  indeed 
been  realized,  for  in  the  establishment  of  those  towns  was 
first  proclaimed  to  the  world,  so  far  as  I  know,  in  a  written 
constitution,  the  great  doctrine  of  the  right  of  the  people 
to  govern  themselves,  and  that  principle  is  gradually  but 
surely  possessing  the  earth.  From  the  banks  of  our  beauti 
ful  river  that  idea  went  forth  conquering  and  to  conquer. 
If  in  a  wider  sense  the  motto  Qui  transtulit  sustinet  re 
fers  to  the  whole  body  of  the  people  who  had  fled  from 
oppressions  and  persecution  as  the  special  object  of  the 
Almighty's  care,  that  faith  has  indeed  been  justified  in 
the  wonderful  Providence  which  has  sustained  and  carried 


558  Orville  H.  Platt 

on  the  government  which  may  be  traced  to  those  begin 
nings  on  the  banks  of  the  Connecticut.  Our  shield  is  in 
deed  the  shield  of  faith,  and  until  we  depart  from  the  faith 
of  the  fathers  we  may  rely  with  confidence  upon  the 
sustaining  grace  and  power  of  the  Almighty.  He  who 
brought  us  over  still  sustains  us. 

When  these  formal  ceremonies  were  over  and  Mr. 
Platt  had  returned  to  Washington,  the  members  of  the 
General  Assembly  conceived  an  unprecedented  compli 
ment — a  reception  by  the  State  of  Connecticut  to  Sena 
tor  and  Mrs.  Platt  in  which  all  citizens  of  the  State  were 
asked  to  participate.  It  was  like  the  Senator  to  stipu 
late  that  the  plans  be  simple.  He  even  asked  the  com 
mittee  which  visited  Washington  to  confer  with  him 
that  it  should  be  announced  that  evening  dress  would 
not  be  expected,  so  that  none  need  feel  ill  at  ease  who 
might  wish  to  attend.  After  the  departure  of  the 
committee,  he  wrote  to  H.  Wales  Lines: 

Senators  Cook  and  Paige  have  been  down  here  to  con 
sult  Mrs.  Platt  and  myself  about  the  reception,  and  I  have 
said  that  I  would  leave  the  matter  to  the  good  judgment  of 
the  committee,  suggesting  only  that  it  shall  be  made  not 
too  elaborate  or  expensive;  that  it  should  be  kept  simple 
and  democratic  enough  so  that  all  who  wish  to  do  so  would 
feel  free  to  attend.  We  rather  fixed  on  the  twentieth  of 
March  for  it.  ...  I  have  no  doubt  it  will  pass  off  nicely. 
I  have  a  little  bit  of  a  dread  of  it,  lest  I  should  not  appear 
just  as  I  ought.  I  suppose  this  is  born  of  my  old  country 
breeding,  rather  than  society  experience. 

Weeks  were  spent  in  preparation  for  the  event. 
Over  6500  invitations  were  issued  to  friends  of  the 
Senator  inside  the  State  and  out.  It  was  made  clear 
also  that  every  citizen  of  Connecticut  would  be  welcome, 


A  State's  Crowning  Tribute          559 

and  there  was  a  gathering  on  the  night  of  March  2oth, 
which  was  the  most  memorable  social  function  in  the 
history  of  the  State.  Special  trains  brought  to  Hart 
ford  citizens  of  every  county,  and  over  10,000  people 
crowded  into  the  illuminated  Capitol  to  do  honor  to  the 
first  citizen  of  the  commonwealth,  one  who  had  out 
lived  personal  envy  and  political  rivalries.  The  leaders 
in  politics,  business,  and  the  professions  were  on  hand, 
and  there  was  an  outpouring  of  the  plain  people  such  as 
Hartford  had  never  seen  before.  It  was  the  most 
representative  assemblage  of  the  citizens  of  the  whole 
State  which  has  ever  been  known.  For  many  hours  the 
multitude  passed  before  Mr.  and  Mrs.  Platt,  while  there 
arose  from  all  over  Connecticut  and  even  beyond  its 
borders  a  chorus  of  praise.  Messages  of  congratula 
tion  came  from  the  highest  officials  at  Washington. 
A  type  of  these  was  that  from  Senator  Beveridge  of 
Indiana : 

I  admire  Senator  Platt  more  than  any  man  in  public 
life.  He  is  regarded  among  us  in  the  Senate  as  our  greatest 
constructive  statesman.  In  my  State  of  Indiana  he  has 
long  been  the  ideal  of  American  public  life.  I  doubt 
if  the  utterances  of  any  man  have  equal  weight  with  the 
American  people  when  he  sees  fit  to  present  his  views  on 
any  public  question. 

Said  the  Hartford  C  our  ant: 

• 

We  are  not  at  all  sure  that  Mr.  Platt  knows  even  yet, 
after  all  these  years,  the  real  width,  depth,  and  warmth  of 
his  State's  liking  for  him.  He  will  get  additional  light  on 
the  subject  before  bedtime. 

His  visit  to  Hartford  last  fall  was  political.  He  came  to 
take  the  chair  in  a  party  convention.  The  errand  that 
brings  him  to  the  old  capital  city  to-day  is  of  a  different 


560  Orville  H.  Platt 

and  more  genial  nature.  He  is  the  honored  and  beloved 
guest  of  the  State — of  all  the  people  of  the  State.  There  's 
no  politics  in  this  welcome;  the  bugles  have  sung  truce. 
We  are  not  Republicans  and  Democrats  to-day;  we  are 
Connecticut  folks  trying  to  make  Mr.  Platt  of  Connecticut 
(as  the  official  reporters  of  the  Senate  call  him)  understand 
how  proud  we  all  are  of  our  right  and  title  in  him.  .  .  . 

Meriden  has  had  a  good  citizen  in  him  for  fifty  years  and 
two.  He  has  obeyed  every  order  of  duty;  a  soldier  could 
do  no  more.  He  was  diligent  in  the  service  of  his  town 
before  he  was  called  into  the  service  of  his  State.  From 
his  first  year  in  the  chamber  a  conscientious,  hard-working, 
painstaking  Senator,  he  has  grown  and  broadened  and 
ripened  into  a  leading  Senator — great  in  influence,  great 
in  usefulness.  His  name  is  spoken  with  respect  in  distant 
States.  Yet  at  home  he  is  still  the  unfrilled  Connecticut 
man,  interested  in  local  affairs,  a  friendly  neighbor  among 
neighbors,  seeking  and  enjoying 

"the  talk 

Man  holds  with  week-day  man  in  the  hourly  walk 
Of  the  mind's  business." 

Your  free-spoken  admirer  in  the  White  House  is  right, 
Senator  Platt.  You  are,  as  he  forcibly  says,  a  "Bully  Old 
Boy. "  Hartford  is  glad  to  have  you  here  on  this  twentieth 
day  of  March,  1903;  the  legislators,  state  officers,  judges, 
reverend  clergy,  learned  physicians,  poor  but  honest 
lawyers,  and  plain  people  won't  do  a  thing  to  you. 

The  words  of  the  New  Haven  Leader  were  character 
istic  of  many  others : 

Last  night's  great  reception  was  unique  and  without 
precedent  in  New  England  history.  Never  before  has  any 
public  man  or  private  citizen  received  such  a  distinctively 
personal  tribute. 

Well  may  Senator  Platt  feel  proud  of  the  honor  done 


A  State's  Crowning  Tribute  561 

him,  and  prouder  still  are  the  people  of  Connecticut  that 
they  have  one  whom  they  can  justly  accord  the  highest 
tributes  of  respect  they  are  capable  of  expressing. 

It  was  expected  that  the  reception  would  be  a  big 
one,  but  nobody  anticipated  such  a  pilgrimage  to  the 
capital  city  as  last  night  taxed  the  railroads  to  the  last 
available  car  of  carrying  capacity,  and  thronged  the 
Capitol  building  with  countless  hundreds  who  came  just 
to  say,  "I  am  heartily  glad  to  see  you,  Senator,  friend, and 
faithful  public  servant — ORVILLE  H.  PLATT.  " 

Truly  it  may  be  said  of  Orville  H.  Platt:  This  man  was 
born  for  the  public  good. 

A  few  days  after  his  return  to  Washington,  weary 
but  rejoicing,  he  wrote  to  Senator  Charles  C.  Cook, 
Chairman  of  the  Reception  Committee : 

I  have  had  no  real  opportunity  until  now  to  express 
through  you  and  your  committee,  to  the  Governor,  State 
officers,  and  the  Legislature,  my  deep  appreciation  of  the 
honor  conferred  upon  Mrs.  Platt  and  myself  by  the  splendid 
and  enthusiastic  reception  given  us  at  the  Capitol  on  the 
twentieth  of  March.  To  be  honored  by  the  representatives 
of  the  good  State  of  Connecticut,  and  by  its  people  with 
so  much  unanimity,  heartiness,  and  sincerity,  touched  my 
heart  as  nothing  else  could  have  done.  It  seemed  to  evi 
dence  the  fact  that  by  years  of  service  I  had  succeeded  in 
winning  the  confidence,  respect,  and  esteem  of  my  fellow 
citizens,  than  which  nothing  could  more  fully  satisfy  or 
please  me.  To  have  served  the  State  of  Connecticut  as 
best  I  might  for  twenty-four  years  in  the  Senate  of  the 
United  States,  and  to  have  been  honored  by  election  for  an 
other  term  of  six  years,  is  indeed  something  of  which  to 
be  justly  proud ;  but  to  have  been  made  to  feel  by  such  a 
reception  that  the  people  of  the  State  trusted  me  and 
manifested  toward  me  real  affection,  more  than  satisfies 
and  gratifies  me.  Hove  Connecticut  and  its  people.  It  has 
36 


562  Orville  H.  Platt 

been  a  pleasure  to  represent  and  to  serve  the  State,  and 
that  its  people  seem  to  love  me,  more  than  fills  the  measure 
of  my  highest  ambition.  I  cannot  in  language  express 
my  sense  of  obligation,  but  I  shall  carry  with  me  to  my 
last  hour,  the  feeling  that  I  have  been  most  highly  honored. 


CHAPTER  XLIV 

FRUITFUL  YEARS 

The  Last  Phase — Ratification  of  Colombian  Treaty — The  Adiron- 
dacks — Special  Session  of  1903 — Pension  Order  78 — Post- 
Office  Scandals — Death  of  Mark  Hanna — Nomination  and 
Election  of  Roosevelt,  1904. 

BEGIRT  with  the  affection  of  the  people  of  his  State, 
the  aged  Senator  approached  the  end  of  his  career. 
The  short  time  he  had  remaining  was  to  be  the  richest 
and  ripest  period  of  his  life,  filled  to  the  brim  with 
achievement  and  honor.  The  special  session  of  the 
Senate  called  in  the  spring  of  1903  to  consider  the  treaty 
with  Colombia  and  the  Cuban  reciprocity  treaty 
passed  without  incident.  Both  treaties  were  ratified, 
a  condition  being  attached  to  the  one  with  Cuba  that 
it  should  not  become  effective  without  action  by 
Congress.  But  the  confinement  of  the  session  following 
the  labors  of  the  preceding  winter  had  left  the  Senator 
in  a  bad  way.  He  was  more  weary  than  he  had 
realized,  and  he  had  no  sooner  reached  Judea  after  the 
adjournment  of  the  Senate  than  he  was  seized  with  an 
attack  of  acute  indigestion  similar  to  those  from  which 
he  had  suffered  before,  but  more  exhausting  in  its 
effects.  His  family  and  friends  were  alarmed  by  his 
condition  and  recognizing  the  inadequacy  of  ordinary 
remedies  they  hurried  him  north  to  the  Adirondacks, 
the  only  place  where  he  could  hope  to  find  relief.  He 

563 


564  Orville  H.  Platt 

went  early  in  June  accompanied  by  Mrs.  Platt  and  by 
Dr.  Ford,  his  family  physician.  That  trip  to  the 
Adirondacks  undoubtedly  prolonged  his  life,  and  when 
he  returned  to  Connecticut  six  weeks  later  he  was  quite 
his  old  self,  ready  to  attack  the  mass  of  work  which  had 
been  accumulating.  A  few  days  at  Kirby  Corner  and  he 
was  off  with  Mrs.  Platt  to  Senator  Aldrich' s  summer  home 
at  Warwick  to  meet  Aldrich,  Allison,  and  Spooner,  a  sub 
committee  entrusted  with  the  consideration  of  finan 
cial  legislation;  for  since  the  pigeonholing  of  the  Aldrich 
bill  by  Congress  the  world  of  business  had  been  praying 
for  speedy  relief.  The  four  elder  statesmen  remained 
at  Warwick  several  days  talking  over  not  only  financial 
measures  but  also  other  questions  which  were  likely  to 
come  before  Congress.  President  Roosevelt  had  given 
it  out  that  he  intended  to  call  an  extraordinary  session 
to  meet  immediately  after  the  November  elections 
so  as  to  enact  a  bill  carrying  the  Cuban  reciprocity 
treaty  into  effect  before  the  movement  of  the  sugar 
crop  in  December.  Mr.  Platt  was  impressed  with  the 
idea  that  the  session  ought  to  be  called  earlier,  if  it 
were  called  at  all,  and  he  brought  his  associates  to 
the  same  way  of  thinking.  He  felt  that  the  financial 
question  having  overshadowed  the  Cuban  question  in 
the  eyes  of  the  business  community,  it  was  just  as  essen 
tial  to  hasten  action  on  one  as  on  the  other.  After 
the  meeting  dissolved  he  took  the  matter  up  with  the 
President  and  with  others.  To  Mark  Hanna  he  wrote : 

We  would  do  no  more  and  accomplish  nothing  any  earlier 
by  having  a  session  begin  November  gth  than  if  we  had  no 
extra  session.  We  have  to  organize  committees  in  the 
Senate  and  in  the  House ;  that  would  take  probably  all  of 
November,  and  then  we  should  be  dawdling  along  through 
December  until  the  Christmas  recess  without  having 


Fruitful  Years  565 

arrived  at  anything  in  the  way  of  legislation.  If  we  could 
start  by  the  fifteenth  of  October  we  might  pass  something 
both  in  relation  to  the  Cuban  treaty  and  financial  matters. 
I  confess  I  doubt  it,  but  the  early  date  gives  us  a  chance, 
and  I  think  the  later  one  gives  us  no  chance  whatever.  .  .  . 
I  write  this  to  you  because  I  know  that  you  will  feel  that 
it  is  a  personal  inconvenience,  but  you  are  Chairman  of 
the  National  Committee,  and  we  must  get  this  financial 
subject  out  of  the  way  as  early  as  possible.  If  we  do  not 
get  it  out  of  the  way  before  the  regular  session,  the  Demo 
crats  will  delay  it  and  organize  their  campaign  in  opposi 
tion  to  it,  keeping  us  discussing  it  until  it  will  not  come 
in  time  to  do  any  good  to  the  business  interests  of  the 
country;  it  will  precipitate  a  discussion  of  the  only  thing 
that  they  have  for  an  issue,  viz.:  their  allegations  that  the 
Republican  party  has  but  one  object,  and  that  is  to  promote 
the  interests  of  Wall  Street  and  the  national  banks. 

Hanna  was  having  a  hard  fight  at  home  ''from  foes 
without  and  within"  and  was  not  favorably  inclined 
to  an  earlier  meeting.  He  thought  the  introduction 
and  consideration  of  a  financial  bill  at  the  time  of 
greatest  activity  might  arouse  a  discussion  which  would 
create  speculation  as  to  the  result  and  very  seriously 
interfere  with  business,  while  as  for  the  Cuban  bill, 
if  it  could  not  be  passed  in  the  sixty  days  after  the  ist 
of  November,  he  did  not  believe  it  could  be  passed  at 
all.  "With  due  deference  to  your  great  age,  experience, 
and  judgment,"  he  wrote  whimsically,  "I  submit 
these  observations  for  your  consideration."  This 
epistolary  passage  with  the  Ohio  Senator  was  an  episode 
in  an  intimate  correspondence  which  had  been  going  on 
all  summer  and  which  continued  after  Mr.  Platt's 
return  from  his  fishing  club  in  Canada  whither  he 
went  for  a  fortnight's  outing  at  the  conclusion  of  the 
Warwick  meeting.  Hanna  was  carrying  on  his  fight 


566  Orville  H.  Platt 

for  re-election  under  the  handicap  of  what  proved  to  be 
his  fatal  illness.  "I  was  very  sorry  to  hear  that  you 
had  an  attack  which  necessitated  your  physician 
prescribing  a  period  of  rest  for  you  and  yet  was  not 
surprised,"  wrote  Platt  early  in  September.  "I  do  not 
know  what  this  thing,which  in  these  days  we  call  'acute 
indigestion,'  is  but  I  know  that  I  had  a  twitch  of  it 
which  was  hard  to  recover  from": 

I  am  intensely  interested  in  your  campaign.  It  does 
not  seem  possible  that  they  can  defeat  your  re-election  but 

"For  ways  that  are  dark 
And  for  tricks  that  are  vain 
The  Heathen  Chinee  is  peculiar." 

Dick  has  written  me  asking  me  to  speak  in  your  cam 
paign.  I  would  do  it  more  gladly  for  you  than  for  any 
man  in  the  United  States,  but  really  I  cannot  risk  it.  I 
am  seventy-six  years  old,  and  cannot  endure  the  fatigue 
and  labor  of  a  campaign.  After  my  warning  of  last  spring 
I  think  I  should  break  down  under  it. 

It  was  well  that  he  spared  himself  and  lived  so  much 
in  the  open  air  of  the  Adirondacks  and  Canada  that 
summer;  for  he  was  kept  busy  enough  during  the  fall 
and  winter  and  was  subject  to  a  strain  which  might  have 
tested  the  powers  of  a  much  younger  man.  Washing 
ton  was  beginning  to  buzz  with  the  preliminaries  of 
the  Presidential  campaign  of  1904,  and  Mr.  Platt  was 
one  of  the  first  to  spring  to  the  support  of  President 
Roosevelt,  even  at  the  risk  of  seeming  unfaithful  to 
his  friend  Mark  Hanna.  The  Republican  National 
Committee  was  called  to  meet  in  Washington  early  in 
December,  and  it  was  expected  that  the  meeting  would 
develop  whatever  opposition  there  might  be  to  Roose 
velt's  nomination.  A  day  or  two  before  the  time  set 


Fruitful  Years  567 

for  the  meeting  Mr.  Platt  announced  himself  in  an 
interview  as  favoring  the  President's  nomination,  and 
he  went  so  far  as  to  declare  that  no  other  Republican 
could  be  elected.  Throughout  the  winter  he  was  the 
President's  right  arm  at  the  Capitol,  dealing  stout 
blows  in  defence  of  the  administration.  The  Panama 
revolution  came  in  the  fall,  and  when  the  Senate  took 
it  up  he  delivered  an  exhaustive  speech  in  support 
of  the  way  in  which  the  President  had  handled  it.  He 
worked  hard  to  get  an  early  vote  on  the  Cuban  recipro 
city  bill.  Mischievous  Chinese  legislation  was  intro 
duced  which  would  have  alienated  China  at  a  critical 
time.  He  prevented  the  Senate  from  acting  on  it. 
An  extravagant  Pension  bill  was  proposed,  and  Congress 
was  in  danger  of  being  swept  off  its  feet.  Mr.  Platt 
was  conversant  with  the  question.  At  one  time  he  had 
been  a  member  of  the  Pensions  Committee  and  its  Acting 
Chairman.  He  deprecated  the  enactment  of  such  far- 
reaching  legislation,  and  he  was  one  of  those  who 
advised  the  President  to  issue  an  executive  order  fixing 
at  sixty-two  years  the  age  at  which  pensionable  dis 
ability  to  the  extent  of  six  dollars  a  month  should  be 
assumed,  thus  appeasing  the  desire  for  liberal  treat 
ment  of  the  survivors  of  the  war  while  preventing  a 
more  serious  raid  on  the  treasury.  When  Pension 
Order  78  became  the  target  for  Democratic  batteries  as 
the  most  notorious  instance  of  executive  encroachment 
upon  the  authority  of  Congress,  he  came  to  the  defence 
of  the  administration,  pointing  out  that  Roosevelt  had 
merely  followed  the  example  set  by  Cleveland  in  fixing 
the  age  for  presumptive  total  disability  at  seventy-five 
and  of  McKinley  in  fixing  at  sixty-five  the  age  at  which 
half  disability  should  be  presumed.  The  thieving 
which  had  been  going  on  in  the  Post- Office  Department 


568  Orville  H.  Platt 

for  years  came  to  light  during  the  spring  and  summer 
of  1903 .  Mr.  Platt  was  deeply  interested  in  the  develop 
ments,  for  he  had  long  suspected  crooked  practices 
there.  Postmaster-General  Payne  was  his  personal 
friend,  and  the  appointment  of  First  Assistant  Post 
master-General  Wynne,  who  instigated  the  inquiry,  had 
been  due  primarily  to  his  suggestion.  After  it  was  all 
over  and  the  culprits  on  their  way  to  the  penitentiary 
the  Democratic  leaders  awoke  to  the  necessity  of  a  drag 
net  investigation  by  Congress  so  as  to  keep  the  scandal 
alive  through  the  campaign.  Mr.  Platt,  who  was  as 
familiar  with  all  the  circumstances  as  any  one  else  at 
the  Capitol,  perceived  the  disingenuousness  of  this 
demand  and  begged  the  President  not  to  yield  to  it; 
but  the  agitation  was  persisted  in  all  through  the  winter 
of  1903-4  and  on  April  i4th,  in  order  that  there  might 
be  no  misunderstanding  of  his  position  he  sent  this  note 
to  the  White  House: 

DEAR  MR.  PRESIDENT: 

I  would  like  you  to  know  that  I  have  not  in  the  slightest 
degree  changed  my  mind  as  to  the  inadvisability  of  any 
sort  of  a  postal  investigation. 

Thus  he  was  kept  busy  with  a  multiplicity  of  tasks 
through  the  long  session.  At  times  he  wondered  how 
long  he  could  stand  it.  To  Dr.  Ford  he  wrote: 

I  would  like  to  have  you  account  for  my  ability  to  do 
the  amount  of  work  I  am  doing  here  in  Washington  and 
have  done  all  this  winter.  If  any  one  had  told  me  last 
October  or  November  that  I  would  come  down  here  and 
take  up  my  labors  and  work  steadily  every  day,  Sundays 
included,  from — say  half-past  eight  or  nine  in  the  morning 
until  ten  or  eleven  o'clock  at  night,  on  topics  which  are 
pending  before  Congress,  I  would  have  said  that  I  could  not 
do  it,  yet  I  have  done  it,  and  presume  I  shall  go  through  to 


Fruitful  Years  569 

the  end.     Whether  I  shall  collapse  then  or  not,  I  do  not 
know.     I  do  know  that  I  shall  want  a  good  long  rest. 

In  the  midst  of  it  all  came  the  great  shock  of  Hanna's 
illness  and  death.  This  happened  in  the  house  in  which 
the  Platts  were  living,  and  the  blow  was  as  hard  as  if 
it  had  been  in  their  own  family.  He  was  especially 
troubled  that  there  should  be  so  much  parade  and  fuss 
about  the  funeral  of  his  friend.  On  the  morning  of  the 
ceremonies  in  the  Senate,  meditating  over  his  cigar 
in  his  room,  he  suddenly  asked:  "If  I  should 
die  here  would  you  have  one  of  these  state  funerals 
for  me?"  and  when  told  that  it  would  be  expected 
he  remarked:  "Hope  I  shan't  die  here;  hope  I  can  go 
home  to  Connecticut  for  that.  I  should  hate  to  be 
dragged  around  Washington  in  this  way,  and  I  don't 
want  to  be!" 

By  the  time  of  the  National  -Convention,  he  was 
completely  worn  out.  Then  came  at  Kirby  Corner  a 
renewal  of  the  attack  of  the  preceding  year,  and  he 
hurried  to  the  Adirondacks  with  Mrs.  Platt  for  what 
proved  to  be  his  last  sojourn  there.  Late  in  August,  he 
came  back  to  civilization  with  the  tonic  of  the  woods 
in  his  blood.  He  wanted  more  rest  but  he  had  to  take 
up  the  burdens  of  the  campaign  at  once.  Governor 
McLean,  who  was  to  have  presided  at  the  Republican 
State  Convention  in  Hartford  on  September  i3th, 
was  ill  and  the  senior  Senator  was  drafted  for  the  duty. 
He  had  to  set  out  immediately  on  the  preparation  of  his 
address  on  which  he  took  especial  pains,  because  he  felt 
that  the  State  "needed  some  stiff  bracing."  It  was  an 
exhaustive  effort  covering  every  point  of  Democratic 
attack  upon  the  administration  and  proved  to  be  one 
of  the  effective  documents  of  the  campaign,  but  it 
used  up  a  lot  of  energy. 


570  Orville  H.  Platt 

He  wrote  to  Congressman  Sperry  a  day  or  two  before 
the  Convention: 

I  have  agonized  over  the  preparation  of  my  speech 
which  has  gone  to  the  printers.  I  am  not  satisfied  with  it. 
I  never  am  when  I  have  to  prepare  a  speech  for  publication. 
There  is  no  inspiration  in  making  a  speech  at  your  desk — 
it  is  like  pumping  water  out  of  a  dry  well.  When  you  get 
up  and  look  an  audience  in  the  face  you  can  say  something, 
but  never  mind — it  will  go  for  what  it  is  worth,  and  in  this 
matter  of  presiding,  I  am  Jack-at-a-pinch  anyway. 

His  resentment  was  roused  by  the  character  of  the 
attacks  made  upon  President  Roosevelt  by  the  Demo 
cratic  candidate,  and  he  was  led  into  making  several 
other  speeches  besides  taking  an  unusual  interest  in 
the  management  of  the  State  campaign.  While  the 
campaign  was  at  the  busiest  he  was  called  upon  to 
deliver  an  address  on  the  occasion  of  the  17  5th  Anni 
versary  of  the  First  Congregational  Church  at  Meriden. 
The  address,  partly  historical  and  partly  doctrinal, 
was  out  of  his  usual  line  but  as  he  wrote  to 
John  Flagg: 

It  was  one  of  the  things  which  I  could  not  very  well 
refuse  to  do,  and  the  way  I  agonized  over  its  preparation 
would  have  amused  you  and  excited  your  pity  at  the  same 
time. 

It  is  no  wonder  that  all  these  things  overtaxed  his 
strength,  so  that  when  he  arrived  in  Washington  after 
the  reaction  from  the  November  victory  he  was  hardly 
in  fit  condition  for  the  exacting  duties  before  him. 


CHAPTER  XLV 

THE  LAST  SESSION 

Chairman  of  Judiciary  Committee — The  Swayne  Impeachment — 

A  Day's  Doings — Legislation  of  Last  Session — Opposes 

Heyburn  Pure  Food  Law. 

IF  Mr.  Platt  had  gone  on  the  Judiciary  Committee  in 
1883  when  he  first  had  the  opportunity,  he  would 
have  become  its  Chairman  in  the  Fifty-second  Congress 
in  1893  on  the  retirement  of  Edmunds;  for  he  would 
have  been  the  senior  member  then  in  service.  When 
Henry  M.  Teller  resigned  from  the  Senate  in  1882  to 
become  Secretary  of  the  Interior,  it  left  a  vacancy  on 
the  Committee  of  which  Edmunds  was  Chairman  and 
David  Davis  of  Illinois  the  ranking  Democratic 
member.  Edmunds  and  Davis  asked  Platt  to  take 
Teller's  place.  It  was  a  great  compliment  to  him, 
for  he  was  still  a  fledgling  among  his  fellows  and 
he  wanted  to  go  on  the  Committee.  He  spoke  about 
it  to  Mr.  Hoar  who  had  seen  a  little  longer  service 
than  he.  The  Massachusetts  Senator  informed  him 
that  he  wanted  the  place  himself  and  felt  that  it 
belonged  to  him  on  the  ground  of  seniority  if  it  were 
going  to  New  England.  So  Mr.  Platt  explained  the 
situation  to  Edmunds  and  Davis  and  withdrew  in  favor 
of  Hoar,  who  became  Chairman  in  due  course  on  the 
retirement  of  Edmunds.  Platt  in  turn  succeeded  to 
Edmunds' s  place  as  a  New  England  member  of  the 

571 


572  Orville  H.  Platt 

Committee  at  a  time  when  he  would  have  been  its 
Chairman  but  for  his  earlier  self-sacrifice.  Now  Hoar 
was  gone  and  the  chairmanship  came  to  Platt.  He 
had  waited  many  years  for  the  distinction,  and  he  was 
to  enjoy  it  only  a  little  while. 

The  last  session  of  the  Fifty-eighth  Congress,  brief 
though  it  was,  had  in  it  enough  of  interest  to  make  any 
session  memorable.  It  marked  the  end  not  only  of 
the  Congress  but  also  of  the  first  administration  of 
President  Roosevelt,  who  had  just  received  a  dazzling 
endorsement  at  the  polls.  For  some  reason  the  radicals 
in  all  parties  seemed  to  expect  that  the  administration 
would  be  marked  by  revolutionary  demonstrations, 
that  there  would  be  a  general  onslaught  on  the  trusts, 
the  tariff,  the  railroads,  and  vested  rights.  The  elder 
statesmen  in  the  Senate  were  filled  with  apprehension. 
They  had  confidence  in  the  Executive,  but  they  feared 
the  signs  of  the  times  and  dreaded  the  spirit  of  socialism 
and  populism  run  wild.  Mr.  Platt  returned  to  Wash 
ington  weighed  down  with  a  sense  of  foreboding.  *  'The 
great  victory  in  November,"  he  wrote,  "started  up 
every  fool  crank  in  the  United  States  and  we  are  going 
to  have  lots  of  trouble."  We  have  seen  how  he  exerted 
his  influence  to  postpone  a  revision  of  the  tariff  and  how 
he  discouraged  the  manifestation  of  an  unreasoning 
campaign  against  the  railroads  and  the  trusts.  He 
knew  that  something  must  be  done  sooner  or  later  on  all 
these  questions,  but  he  wanted  to  go  slow,  and  he  doubted 
whether  a  restraining  hand  could  long  prevail.  The 
House  was  ready  for  anything.  The  Senate  might  be 
swept  from  its  moorings  by  the  spirit  of  the  hour,  and 
up  to  the  day  of  final  adjournment  the  Connecticut 
Senator  kept  looking  for  the  first  sign  of  weakening  in 
the  legislative  foundations. 


The  Last  Session  573 

As  Chairman  of  the  Judiciary  Committee  and  as  a 
member  of  the  Committee  on  Finance,  he  was  in  the  way 
to  impress  his  conservatism  on  his  associates  and  on 
the  administration,  and  his  position  was  strengthened 
by  the  support  he  gave  to  the  President  and  Secretary 
Hay  in  matters  of  international  concern  in  which  they 
were  deeply  interested. 

As  if  the  Senate  did  not  have  business  enough  to 
attend  to  in  ordinary  course,  the  House  of  Representa 
tives  invited  further  congestion  by  impeaching  Charles 
Swayne,  Judge  of  the  District  Court  of  the  United  States 
for  the  Northern  District  of  Florida,  of  high  crimes  and 
misdemeanors  in  office.  The  charges  against  Swayne 
were  petty,  and  there  was  some  irritation  in  the  Senate 
that  the  scant  time  at  its  disposal  should  be  invaded 
for  their  consideration.  Yet  proceedings  having  been 
instituted,  they  must  be  treated  as  solemnly  as  if  the 
charges  were  momentous  and  the  culprit  the  Chief 
Justice  of  the  United  States.  It  had  been  many  years 
since  the  Senate  had  sat  as  a  high  court  of  impeachment. 
The  last  occasion  had  been  in  the  trial  of  Secretary 
Belknap  in  a  former  generation,  so  that  the  duties 
which  fell  upon  the  Chairman  of  the  Judiciary  Committee 
found  him  handicapped  by  lack  of  experience.  Not 
only  did  Mr.  Platt  have  to  handle  the  preliminaries  of 
the  trial,  but  when  the  time  for  it  came,  Mr.  Frye,  the 
President  pro  tempore,  begged  on  account  of  illness  to 
be  excused  from  the  confining  task  of  presiding  over 
the  court,  and  Mr.  Platt  was  named  in  his  stead.  The 
Connecticut  Senator  might  well  have  pleaded  age  and 
feebleness  also,  but  with  characteristic  fidelity  he  bent 
his  back  to  the  burden.  For  over  a  month,  in  addition 
to  all  his  other  duties,  he  was  obliged  to  preside  over  the 
wearisome  deliberations  of  the  court,  to  listen  to  the 


574  Orville  H.  Platt 

interminable  testimony  and  the  arguments  of  counsel, 
and  to  pass  upon  questions  of  procedure.  No  one  who 
witnessed  the  Senate  in  session  during  that  period  is 
likely  soon  to  forget  it.  The  presiding  officer  invested 
the  proceedings  with  simple  dignity,  and  at  their  con 
clusion  an  impressive  picture  remained  in  the  records 
of  the  Senate.  Yet  all  this  time  he  was  struggling  with 
an  insidious  illness.  Early  in  the  trial  he  had  been 
seized  with  an  attack  of  grippe  from  which  he  never 
fully  recovered.  He  might  without  criticism  have 
quit  his  work  in  Washington  altogether,  but  he  clung  to 
it  as  though  it  were  a  religious  penance.  Every  morn 
ing  he  roused  himself  with  an  effort  to  go  to  the  Capitol 
in  a  closed  carriage,  and  every  evening  he  returned  to 
his  rooms  to  complete  the  day  in  bed.  All  through  it, 
too,  he  attended  to  the  multifarious  business  of  the 
Senate,  carrying  the  while,  as  had  been  the  case  for 
years,  the  peculiar  local  business  which  otherwise  would 
have  fallen  upon  his  dying  colleague. 

In  a  whimsical  mood  one  night,  resting  a  little  after 
completing  his  work,  he  dictated,  at  his  Secretary's 
suggestion,  a  partial  list  of  the  day's  doings,  so  far  as 
they  could  be  recalled.  It  is  the  kind  of  a  diary  which 
might  interest  the  constituents  of  any  influential 
Senator: 

Tuesday,  January  31,  1905. 

Woman  from  Postoffice  Department  came,  before  I  had 
finished  my  breakfast,  to  ask  me  to  stand  back  of  her,  etc. 

Started  Miss  Lawler  off  on  work  which  kept  her  busy 
until  after  two  o'clock,  while  smoking  my  cigar  and  reading 
the  paper. 

Signed  batch  of  letters. 

Conference  in  parlor  downstairs  (Arlington)  with  Gover 
nor  Murphy. 


The  Last  Session  575 

Interview  with  Mr.  Harrison. 

More  letters. 

Went  to  Attorney-General's  office  in  Garvin  matter,  and 
to  discuss  bill  allowing  bench  warrants  issued  by  Federal 
courts  to  run  all  over  the  United  States. 

Went  to  State  Department  to  get  a  bill,  sent  me  in  ref 
erence  to  naturalization,  corrected — State  Department 
blundered. 

Secretary  Loomis  wanted  to  talk  with  me  about  arbitra 
tion  treaties. 

Hurried  from  there  to  committee  room  for  eleven  o'clock 
meeting  on  impeachment  proceedings,  which  lasted  until 
twelve  o'clock. 

Discussed  arbitration  with   Spooner. 

Dr.  Wiley  about  appropriation  to  investigate  leprosy. 

Then  to  the  Senate. 

W —  bothered  me  about  a  couple  of  cases  before  his 
committee. 

G —  about  certificates  of  incorporation,  issued  to  the 
District  under  the  code.  Got  all  the  reports  and  data  on 
that  subject. 

Discussed  in  the  Senate  proposition  to  condemn  land 
for  irrigation  purposes. 

Discussed  other  matters. 

Called  out  three  or  four  times  by  newspaper  corre 
spondents,  to  find  out  what  was  doing  in  regard  to  several 
matters. 

Solberg  came  over  from  library  with  reference  to  Copy 
right  bill ;  listened  to  him  while  I  took  my  lunch. 

Looked  up  condition  of  bill  providing  for  the  building 
of  a  new  bridge  across  the  Missouri  River  between  Omaha 
and  Council  Bluffs;  telegraphed  Seligman  and  Co.  in 
relation  to  same. 

Crank  volume  came  over  from  Speaker  Cannon. 

Hill  with  reference  to  various  matters. 

B —  after  me  four  or  five  times. 

Went  up  in  document  room  to  hunt  up  an  old  case  in 


576  Orville  H.  Platt 

relation  to  refunding  of  money  to  Madison  County,  Ken 
tucky — taxes  collected. 

Newspaper  men  again  after  adjournment;  then  finally 
to  the  Arlington. 

Signed  thirty-seven  letters. 

Read  over  proceedings  in  several  important  matters 
pending,  before  dinner;  read  Star  and  other  newspapers. 

Dinner  with  Mrs.  Platt  without  serious  interruption!!! 

Senator  Stewart  about  Indian  matters. 

Walter  Eli  Clark  about  Wickersham  case. 

Elliott  about  seals. 

Had  planned  to  take  up  my  correspondence  at  7:30; 
reached  room  about  nine  o'clock. 

Went  through  about  a  week's  accumulation  of  mail, 
dictated  twenty- three  letters,  and  straightened  up  several 
matters  by  10:30,  when  I  felt  I  could  dismiss  my  clerk 
for  the  night. 

A  mere  recital  of  the  'questions  of  legislation  in  which 
he  interested  himself  makes  a  formidable  array.  He 
secured  an  amendment  to  the  Military  Academy 
Appropriation  bill  placing  General  Hawley  on  the  re 
tired  list  of  the  army.  He  offered  amendments  to  the 
Heyburn  Pure  Food  bill,  the  Naval  Appropriation  bill, 
and  minor  measures;  he  handled  a  bill  amending  the 
copyright  law,  he  secured  the  enactment  of  a  dozen 
pension  bills,  and  reported  several  measures  from  com 
mittees  to  which  he  belonged;  he  delivered  eulogies  on 
Hanna,  Hoar,  and  Ingalls,  each  in  its  way  a  high  speci 
men  of  memorial  eloquence.  He  spoke  more  than  a 
hundred  times,  debating  in  greater  or  less  detail  nearly 
fifty  measures,  criticising  and  delaying  many  private 
bills  and  items  in  appropriation  bills  which  but  for  his 
watchfulness  would  have  slipped  through.  He  worked 
for  the  ratification  of  the  arbitration  treaties  and  the 
treaty  with  San  Domingo.  He  discussed  at  some 


The  Last  Session  577 

length  extravagance  in  printing,  the  distribution  of 
seeds,  the  pressing  of  claims  for  injury  to  employes  in 
government  shops.  He  opposed  the  Pure  Food  bill 
which  the  newspapers  of  the  day  were  calling  upon 
Congress  to  enact  and  in  favor  of  which  the  Senate  was 
flooded  with  petitions.  He  was  not  against  all  legisla 
tion,  but  he  declared  that  he  would  not  vote  for  a  bill 
like  the  one  under  consideration: 

I  do  not  believe  there  are  twenty  Senators  out  of  the 
whole  number  of  Senators  here  who  believe  that  this 
is  such  a  bill  as  ought  to  be  passed,  and  for  one  I  am  not 
going  to  pass  a  bill  in  a  hurry  because  there  is  some  clamor 
somewhere  that  the  subject  mufct  be  attended  to.  '  The 
old  adage  about  marrying  in  haste  and  repenting  at  leisure 
might  well  be  applied  to  legislation — legislate  in  haste  and 
repent  at  leisure.  ...  I  do  not  think  the  committee 
ought  to  bring  any  such  bill  here.  I  think  it  is  contrary 
to  the  spirit  of  our  laws,  to  the  spirit  of  justice,  to  the  spirit 
of  fair  play,  to  prosecute  and  convict  any  man  for  violat 
ing  police  regulations,  and  bills  of  this  sort,  when  he  is 
entirely  innocent  of  any  intent  to  violate  them. 

It  seemed  to  him  that  the  evil  could  be  remedied  in 
another  way: 

Suppose  a  bill  were  framed  which  defined  what  should  be 
adulterated  and  misbranded  articles.  Then  suppose  the 
bill  required  that  every  manufacturer  who  put  his  goods 
into  interstate  commerce,  or  any  other  person  who  put 
goods  into  interstate  commerce — that  is,  shipped  them 
from  one  State  to  another, — should  place  upon  the  goods  a 
guarantee  that  they  were  not  adulterated  and  not  mis- 
branded  within  the  definitions  of  the  act.  I  do  not  see 
why  the  whole  subject  would  not  be  reached  in  that  simple 
way.  Then  the  person  guilty  of  selling  misbranded  or 
adulterated  articles  is  easily  found,  easily  prosecuted,  and 

37 


578  Orville  H.  Platt 

all  the  people  who  might  be  entirely  innocent,  who  had 
no  desire  to  violate  the  law, would  have  no  trouble  about  it 
whatever. 

The  wonder  is  that  he  should  have  borne  up  under 
the  strain  so  long  as  he  did,  but  he  carried  his  work 
right  through  to  the  fourth  of  March,  with  the  ''crush 
ing,  grinding  avalanche  of  legislation"  incident  to  the 
closing  weeks  of  a  Congress,  and  witnessed  the  cere 
monies  inducting  President  Roosevelt  into  office.1 


»  An  interesting  light  has  been  thrown  on  the  Senator's  last 
days  in  Washington  by  the  talented  newspaper  correspondent, 
James  B.  Morrow.  Shortly  after  Mr.  Platt*  s  death  he  wrote  in  the 
Cleveland  Leader  : 

"I  suppose  I  was  the  last  newspaper  man  who  went  to  see  him 
in  Washington.  He  was  ill  and  showed  it.  During  the  impeach 
ment  trial  of  Judge  Swayne  he  had  acted  as  President  of  the  court 
and  had  overtaxed  his  strength.  He  was  seventy-eight  years  old 
and  had  suffered  during  the  winter  from  two  attacks  of  grippe.  The 
Senate  was  in  special  session,  being  carried  along  after  Mr.  Roose 
velt's  inauguration  for  the  purpose  of  confirming  appointments 
and  in  an  attempt  to  ratify  the  treaty  with  San  Domingo.  Platt 
wanted  to  get  away;  he  longed  for  his  home  in  Connecticut;  he 
was  weary  of  Washington  and  the  work  of  Congress. 

' '  I  found  him  just  after  an  executive  session  of  the  Senate  in  the 
committee  room.  He  was  walking  the  floor  with  nervous  energy, 
still  tall  and  erect  in  his  body,  still  handsome  in  feature  and  coun 
tenance,  and  still  graceful  and  steady  in  his  physical  movements. 
Another  effort  had  been  made  to  come  to  a  vote  on  the  treaty,  but 
it  had  failed.  The  morning  had  been  spent  in  useless  talk,  and 
opposition  to  the  treaty  was  not  alone  garrulous,  but  was  becoming 
decidedly  partisan  and  obstinate.  Standing  in  the  centre  of  the 
room  was  a  man  who  had  called  to  ask  Platt  to  write  an  article 
for  a  magazine  on  a  subject  of  some  importance. 

1  'I  haven't  time,'  Platt  said  in  no  gracious  mood  or  tone. 
'I  have  n't  had  any  leisure  for  thirty  years.  I  made  a  speech  on 
the  subject  you  want  me  to  write  about.  Go  look  it  up  and  see 
what  I  said.  I  don't  know  how  it  is  with  you, '  he  said  to  the  man, 
'but  when  I  get  through  with  a  subject  I  pour  it  all  out  of  my  mind. 
If  I  ever  take  it  up  again,  I  have  to  go  over  the  ground  just  as  I 


The  Last  Session  579 

Some  of  his  Connecticut  friends  who  came  to  the 
inauguration  remonstrated  with  him  for  overtaxing 
his  slender  physical  resources  during  the  trial,  and  he 
admitted  that  perhaps  he  ought  to  have  remained  in 

did  before.  I  am  asked  every  week  to  give  my  opinion  to  news 
papers  and  magazines  and  to  write  them  out.  I  can't  do  it.' 

"The  man  was  sympathetic  and  good-tempered,  and  Platt  began 
to  excuse  his  irritation  by  telling  of  his  bodily  and  mental  weariness. 

"  'You  have  come  at  a  bad  time,'  he  exclaimed.  'I  have  been 
working  for  sixteen  to  eighteen  hours  a  day  for  three  months  and 
am  down  at  the  heel.  The  public,  I  suppose,  thinks  we  have  an 
easy  and  agreeable  time,  but  we  are  worked  to  death.'  And  he 
looked  at  me,  as  I  thought,  to  confirm  his  statement. 

"  'That  is  the  view  out-of-doors,'  I  replied.  'The  world  be 
lieves  the  Senate  to  be  an  altogether  delightful  and  restful  place.' 
This  observation  of  mine  did  the  magazine  man  no  good.  Platt 
stopped  walking  and  looked  at  me  in  considerable  disgust.  I 
fancy  there  was  some  pity,  too,  in  his  mind,  for  such  stupid 
ignorance  of  an  incontrovertible  fact.  William  Brimage  Bate, 
Senator  from  Tennessee,  was  at  that  moment  dead  and  in  his 
coffin.  He  had  gone  to  Roosevelt's  inauguration,  had  sat  down 
out-doors,  had  been  stricken  by  pneumonia,  and  had  'gone  to 
sleep'  as  St.  Paul  describes  it,  at  the  rare  age  of  seventy-eight. 
Bate  was  in  Platt's  mind  and  so  he  said: 

"  'The  work  of  the  Senate  killed  Hanna,  and  Bate,  whose  funeral 
we  are  to  have  this  afternoon.  It  is  only  by  God's  blessing  that  it 
has  n't  killed  me. ' 

' '  To  re-establish  myself  I  added :  '  Senator  Spooner  complained  to 
me  this  morning  that  he  was  worn  out. ' 

"  '  He  is ;  I  know  he  is, '  Platt  replied. 

"The  magazine  man  in  the  meantime  had  backed  away  toward 
the  door,  but  he  had  not  wholly  given  up  his  pursuit.  'After  the 
special  session  of  the  Senate  is  over, '  he  ventured  to  say,  '  I  '11  come 
to  see  you  again.' 

"  'You  will  not  find  me,'  Platt  answered.  'I  shall  get  out  of 
this  place  on  the  first  train. '  Then  as  he  recollected  the  uncer 
tainty  of  his  going  and  the  contumacy  of  the  Democrats,  he  added 
in  some  gentleness:  'However,  if  they  keep  on  talking  about  the 
treaty,  I  fear  we  shall  be  kept  here  all  summer. '  The  man  waited 
in  silence  at  the  door,  and  as  Platt  thereafter  utterly  ignored  his 
presence  and  turned  to  talk  with  me,  he  softly  went  out,  thinking 
no  doubt  that  the  Senator  from  Connecticut  was  a  peevish  and 


580  Orville  H.  Platt 

his  room,  but  he  said  earnestly:  "It  was  just  as  neces 
sary  that  I  should  attend  that  impeachment  court  each 
day  as  that  a  man  should  be  on  hand  when  he  is  going 
to  be  hanged." 

much  over-estimated  old  man.  But  he  had  simply  appeared  'at 
a  bad  time. '  Any  one  who  loves  to  live  in  the  woods,  to  search 
the  fields  for  flowers,  and  to  stand  in  the  water  and  whip  a  brook 
for  trout,  contains  the  very  elements  of  joy  and  sunshine.  But 
with  Platt  these  were  not  on  the  surface.  Friendship  dug  for 
them  and  found  them.  Strangers  never  had  that  chance,  but  if 
they  happened  around  at  the  right  time  they  were  fairly  treated 
and  sent  away  without  offence." 


CHAPTER  XLVI 

THE  END 

A    President's    Letter — Funeral  of   General  Hawley — Address  at 
Hartford — Death   and    Burial. 

AFTER  the  fourth  of  March,  the  Senate  remained 
in  uneventful  session  for  a  fortnight,  according  to 
the  usual  practice  with  a  new  administration,  the  only 
business  transacted  being  the  confirmation  of  nomina 
tions  and  the  consideration  of  the  San  Domingo  treaty. 
The  days  were  sultry  and  unseasonable,  sapping  the 
vitality  of  an  old  man  still  suffering  from  an  exhausting 
winter's  work.  Mr.  Platt's  friends  at  home  had  known 
of  his  illness  and  were  devising  schemes  for  restoring 
him  to  health.  One  of  them,  about  to  cross  the  ocean, 
invited  him  and  Mrs.  Platt  to  go  along.  But  the 
Senator  would  not  hear  to  it: 

I  can  not  go  to  Europe  with  you.  I  wish  I  could.  You 
will  say  I  need  it  and  must  have  the  rest,  but  there  are 
things  that  I  must  do,  so  that  I  can  not  be  gone  for  six 
weeks  or  thereabouts  from  the  twentieth  of  April. 

And  to  Dr.  Ford  he  wrote : 

We  will  get  away  from  here  before  long,  but  that  will  not 
stop  my  work,  though  I  shall  come  home  just  as  soon  as  I 
can.  I  can  not  break  up  my  Adirondacks  trip  for  anything, 
and  I  can  not  do  the  other  things  that  I  must  do,  and  go  to 
Europe  and  the  Adirondacks  too.  Besides,  it  would  be 

581 


582  Orville  H.  Platt 

no  sort  of  rest  for  me     I  want  a  rocking-chair  and  a  wood 
fire  and  quiet  for  a  few  days. 

In  recognition  of  his  completion  of  twenty-six  years 
of  service  in  the  Senate,  Charles  Henry  Butler,  Reporter 
of  the  Supreme  Court,  a  long-time  friend,  had  arranged 
to  give  him  a  dinner  on  Saturday,  March  i8th,  the  day 
on  which  the  special  session  of  the  Senate  came  to  an 
end.  Invitations  had  been  sent  to  the  most  notable  men 
in  Washington,  the  President,  the  Vice-President,  the 
Chief  Justice,  the  Secretary  of  State,  his  closest  associ 
ates  in  the  Senate.  On  the  eve  of  the  dinner,  word  came 
that  General  Hawley,  who  had  been  dying  slowly  for 
months,  was  about  to  pass  into  the  hereafter.  He  was 
no  longer  a  member  of  the  Senate,  his  term  of  service 
having  just  come  to  an  end,  but  he  had  been  a  colleague 
and  close  friend  for  a  quarter  of  a  century  and  at  Mr. 
Platt 's  request  the  invitations  were  recalled.  The 
sequel  was  as  marked  a  tribute  as  the  dinner  would  have 
been.  Letters  of  hearty  eulogy  were  received  from 
many  of  the  intended  guests,  among  them  this  from 
President  Roosevelt: 

WHITE  HOUSE,  March  18,  1905. 
MY  DEAR  MR.  BUTLER: 

May  I,  through  you,  extend  my  heartiest  greetings  to 
the  guest  of  the  evening,  Senator  O.  H.  Platt.  It  is  difficult 
to  say  what  I  really  think  of  Senator  Platt  without  seeming 
to  use  extravagant  expression.  I  do  not  know  a  man  in 
public  life  who  is  more  loved  and  honored,  or  who  has  done 
more  substantial  and  disinterested  service  to  the  country. 
It  makes  one  feel  really  proud  as  an  American,  to  have 
such  a  man  occupying  such  a  place  in  the  councils  of  the 
nation.  As  for  me  personally,  I  have  now  been  associated 
with  him  intimately  during  four  sessions  of  Congress,  and 
I  can  not  overstate  my  obligations  to  him,  not  only  for 


The  End  583 

what  he  has  done  by  speech  and  vote,  but  because  it  gives 
me  heart  and  strength  to  see  and  consult  with  so  fearless, 
high-minded,  practicable,  and  far-sighted  a  public  servant. 
Wishing  you  a  most  pleasant  evening,  believe  me 
Sincerely  yours, 

THEODORE  ROOSEVELT. 

Mr.  Platt  was  keenly  affected  and  sent  to  Mr.  Butler 
a  note  in  which  he  said : 

MY  DEAR  MR.  BUTLER: 

There  are  several  things  I  want  to  say,  and  yet  do  not 
know  how  to  say  them.  Your  desire  to  give  me  a  dinner 
on  the  occasion  of  my  having  served  twenty-six  years  in 
the  Senate,  touched  me  more  closely  than  I  can  tell  you, 
and  again,  the  kind  and  flattering  words  of  the  gentlemen 
whom  you  invited  to  meet  me,  either  in  acceptance,  or 
equally  in  their  expressions  of  regret,  touched  me  even  more 
deeply.  Above  all,  the  written  words  of  the  President, 
which  I  cannot  but  believe  were  sincere,  made  me  feel 
that  what  I  have  tried  to  do  through  these  many  eventful 
years  is  appreciated  beyond  what  I  could  have  any  reason 
to  expect.  I  can  never  forget  them.  I  wish  you  would  let 
me  have  a  copy  of  the  President's  letter.  As  the  world 
counts  gain,  I  have  not  much  to  leave  those  who  come  after 
me,  but  as  I  count  fortune,  I  could  leave  no  greater  inheri 
tance  than  that  estimate  of  the  most  distinguished  man  in 
this  country,  or  the  world.  I  can  not  understand  it  all, 
but  I  am  sure  I  appreciate  it.  It  was  a  great  disappoint 
ment  to  me,  as  I  know  it  must  have  been  to  you,  that  under 
the  circumstances  I  felt  it  best  that  the  dinner  should  be 
called  off,  but  I  assure  you  that  I  shall  always  remember 
the  friendship  which  prompted  you  to  propose  it,  and  the 
affectionate  regard  which  all  who  were  invited  to  participate 
in  it  seem  to  cherish  for  me. 

Most  sincerely  yours, 

O.  H.  PLATT. 


584  Orville  H.  Platt 

General  Hawley  died  on  the  day  set  for  the  dinner. 
The  burial  was  at  Hartford,  with  the  ceremonies  be 
fitting  a  distinguished  public  service,  and  Senator  Platt 
went  north  on  the  funeral  train.  It  was  a  raw  and 
blustering  day  in  Hartford.  He  became  chilled  as  he 
waited  a  long  time  with  bared  head  on  the  platform  of 
the  railway  station. 

The  General  Assembly  gathered  in  joint  convention 
for  memorial  services,  and  he  spoke  a  eulogy  by  which 
all  who  heard  him  were  deeply  moved.  His  towering 
form  seemed  shaken  with  grief  as  he  uttered  the  simple 
sentences  which  came  from  his  heart,  concluding  with 
words  which  had  the  fervor  of  a  prayer: 

So  we  will  not  think  of  him  as  dead,  but  living,  and  we 
will  think  of  him  as  we  will  think  of  friends  whom  we  some 
times  go  down  to  see  as  they  sail  away  in  ships  for  foreign 
lands,  never  expecting  to  see  them  with  our  eyes  again,  but 
knowing  that  they  are  still  in  other  fields  exerting  the 
activities  of  life.  We  will  say  farewell  to-day  as  we  com 
mit  him  to  the  earth;  no  no,  not  farewell,  but  that  better 
word  "Good-by" — God  be  with  you,  Good-by.  We  will 
whisper  that  word  "Good-by,"  for  the  heart  feels  most 
when  the  lips  move  not,  and  the  eye  speaks  the  gentle 
"Good-by." 

From  Hartford  he  returned  to  Washington  to  see 
the  President  again  and  attend  to  departmental  busi 
ness,  and  after  two  or  three  irksome  days  he  went  home 
to  Kirby  Corner,  where  he  arrived  on  Tuesday  after 
noon.  For  a  time  he  loafed  about  the  house,  dictating 
a  few  letters,  reading,  smoking,  waiting  for  a  revival 
of  energy  to  take  him  out  on  the  trail  down  to  the  brook 
which  runs  through  the  little  valley  below.  On 
Friday,  the  last  da^  of  March,  he  had  arranged  to  have 


The  End  585 

his  first  outing,  but  instead  there  came  a  chill  and  then  a 
fever.  Dr.  Ford  was  summoned  and  found  him  suffer 
ing  from  bronchitis  with  indications  of  pneumonia.  He 
was  seriously  ill,  but  there  was  nothing  alarming  in 
the  symptoms  until  the  following  Thursday  when  the 
evidences  of  pneumonia  became  pronounced.  News 
of  his  illness  had  gone  out,  and  messages  of  sympathy 
and  encouragement  came  pouring  in.  Then  for  a  few 
days  there  were  signs  of  improvement,  and  for  a  time  it 
looked  as  though  he  might  throw  off  the  disease,  but  the 
poison  was  in  his  blood.  On  Thursday,  April  2oth, 
there  came  a  final  relapse.  He  remarked  quite  casually 
to  Dr.  Ford:  "You  know  what  this  means,  Doctor, 
and  so  do  I."  It  was  the  only  allusion  he  had  made 
to  the  seriousness  of  his  condition.  He  lingered  one 
more  day.  Then,  his  wife  watching  by  his  side,  he 
fell  asleep.  At  seven  minutes  before  nine  o'clock  on 
April  2ist,  his  soul  passed  behind  the  veil  that  hides 
the  eternal  mysteries.  It  was  Good-Friday,  the  day 
on  which  he  always  liked  to  be  among  his  old  friends 
at  home. 

The  announcement  that  the  end  had  come  fell  upon 
the  people  of  Connecticut  with  a  heavy  blow,  and  grief 
sat  on  men's  faces  as  they  talked  among  themselves. 
The  air  was  filled  with  eulogy.  Tributes  sped  home 
from  all  over  the  United  States.  It  was  known  that 
a  strong  man  had  fallen. 

The  Governor  of  the  State  proposed  a  state  funeral. 
Mrs.  Platt  declined  the  offer.  She  wanted  the  burial  to 
be  simple,  and  so  it  was.  It  was  set  for  the  morning  of 
Tuesday,  April  25th.  The  day  was  one  of  the  fairest 
of  the  year,  and  the  Litchfield  hills  were  sprinkled  with 
the  budding  beauty  of  the  spring.  A  plain  oak  coffin 
rested  in  the  living  room  at  Kir  by  Corner  until  the  time 


586  Orville  H.  Platt 

approached  for  carrying  it  to  the  Meeting  House  on  the 
Green.  After  a  custom  of  the  village,  it  was  placed  on 
a  rude  wagon  covered  with  laurel  and  drawn  by  two 
gray  horses  bred  on  the  farm  where  Orville  Platt  had 
grown  to  manhood.  The  horses  were  led  by  two 
neighbors,  while  the  bearers,  old  village  companions, 
walked  on  either  side.  Thus  his  ashes  were  borne  to 
the  church  near  which  had  gathered  over  two  thousand 
people  from  the  country  round  about.  The  church 
within  had  been  fittingly  dressed  with  flowers  and  the 
American  flag. 

There  was  no  eulogy.  The  Episcopal  service  was 
read;  a  choir  of  villagers  led  in  the  singing  of  America, 
and  as  the  body  was  carried  down  the  aisle  they  sang, 
as  a  recessional,  Jerusalem  the  Golden.  Following  the 
wagon  and  its  sacred  burden,  the  people,  with  uncovered 
heads  fell  into  a  procession  which  moved  slowly  from 
the  Meeting  House  to  the  burying-ground  on  the  hillside 
only  a  few  rods  away. 

First  came  the  family  and  servants,  among  them  the 
Senator's  faithful  colored  messenger  James  Hurley. 
Then  came  the  Vice-President  of  the  United  States,  the 
Governor  and  State  officers,  ten  United  States  Senators : 
Bulkeley  of  Connecticut,  Pettus  of  Alabama,  Daniel 
of  Virginia,  Proctor  of  Vermont,  Kean  of  New  Jersey, 
Dick  of  Ohio,  Carter  of  Montana,  Gallinger  of  New 
Hampshire,  Beveridge  of  Indiana,  and  Crane  of  Massa 
chusetts;  the  Connecticut  delegation  in  Congress  and 
other  members  of  the  House  of  Representatives,  Com 
mittees  of  the  General  Assembly,  many  men  of  note 
from  Connecticut  and  other  States,  and  a  great  throng 
of  citizens,  over  one  hundred  men  and  women  from 
Meriden  alone  among  the  number.  The  body  was 
lowered  into  the  grave  overlooking  a  valley  bathed  in 


The  End  587 

sunshine,  with  wooded  hills  beyond.  The  people  joined 
in  singing  "  Praise  God  from  whom  all  blessings  flow," 
thus  with  full  hearts  giving  thanks  for  the  inspiration 
of  a  noble  life. 

A   bronze   tablet   rests   upon   the   grave  with   this 
inscription : 

ORVILLE  HITCHCOCK  PLATT 

OF  CONNECTICUT 

A  SENATOR  OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 
FOR  26  YEARS 

HE  SERVED  GOD 
HIS  COUNTRY  AND  HUMANITY 

WITHOUT  FEAR 
AND  WITHOUT  REPROACH 


CHAPTER  XLVII 

AN    OLD-FASHIONED   SENATOR 

The     Lincoln     of      New      England — Personal      Traits — Mental 

Habit — Religious  Tendencies — A  Lover   of   Old  Ways — 

Lofty  Ideals. 

CONNECTICUT  people  had  a  way  of  calling  their 
senior  Senator  "  The  Abraham  Lincoln  of  New 
England. "  A  great  many  men  have  been  likened  to 
Lincoln  at  one  time  or  another  for  all  sorts  of  reasons, 
so  that  the  comparison  does  not  of  necessity  imply  a 
striking  compliment;  yet  in  his  case  it  had  a  fitness 
arising  from  something  else  than  superficial  physical 
resemblance  or  the  possession  of  homely  qualities  of 
mind;  for  Platt  had  many  of  the  finer  traits  which 
gave  Lincoln  his  peculiar  eminence,  and  knowing  Platt 
one  could  not  help  the  feeling  that  in  Lincoln's  circum 
stances  he  would  have  done  about  as  Lincoln  did. 
But  with  obvious  points  of  similarity  there  were  others 
in  which  the  two  were  not  at  all  alike,  and  it  would  not 
be  right  to  carry  the  comparison  too  far. 

Platt  was  as  tall  as  Lincoln,  towering  nearly  half 
a  foot  above  most  of  his  fellows.  He  carried  himself 
with  natural  dignity  in  spite  of  his  great  height.  Artists 
have  said  of  Lincoln  that  he  had  "  the  awkwardness  of 
nature  which  is  akin  to  grace, "  and  so  had  Platt. 
He  might  have  seemed  ungainly  to  a  chance  observer; 
yet  he  moved  with  the  impressive  ease  that  comes 

588 


An  Old-Fashioned  Senator  589 

from  living  out-of-doors,  from  tramping  unploughed 
fields  and  rock- strewn  hills,  and  marks  the  man  of  rural 
birth  and  habit  from  those  who  dwell  in  towns.  He 
had  a  noble  bearing  born  of  a  noble  mind. 

Those  who  remember  Platt  in  boyhood  agree  that 
his  face  was  strikingly  handsome — almost  Byronic  in 
its  beauty;  and  a  daguerreotype  which  has  come  down 
to  us  bears  out  this  flattering  opinion.  As  he  grew 
to  manhood,  the  features  developed  lines  of  firmness 
which,  to  the  stranger,  often  gave  an  impression  of 
austerity  though  to  those  who  knew  him  well  his  expres 
sion  was  not  stern,  but  filled  with  amiability  and  good 
will.  It  disclosed  a  simple  strength  of  character,  a 
harmony  between  mind  and  body,  an  unconsciousness 
of  observation  and  indifference  to  outward  things  which 
were  a  truthful  revelation  of  the  man  within,  for  no 
one  ever  went  his  way  more  straightly  without  caring 
how  lookers-on  might  be  impressed  by  what  he  did. 

He  had  been  a  shy  and  bashful  boy,  oppressed  with 
self -distrust.  As  he  grew  to  be  a  man,  his  shyness  fell 
away,  though  he  never  seemed  fully  conscious  of  his 
strength;  yet  to  the  end  he  was  keenly  sensitive,  and, 
being  so,  showed  delicate  consideration  for  a  like 
trait  in  others.  Sometimes  when  vexed  and  troubled 
he  seemed  out  of  sorts  to  chance  intruders,  but  he 
was  always  quick  and  generous  with  self-reproach. 
His  transient  mood  would  soon  be  followed  by  a  note 
like  this : 

As  soon  as  you  were  gone  this  morning  I  felt  that  I  had 
not  treated  you  very  courteously  or  politely,  but  you 
caught  me  before  breakfast  and  before  my  cigar,  and  I 
never  half  know  what  I  am  about  then.  Do  not  lay  it  up 
against  me,  will  you  ? 

These  incidents  were  rare,  for  he  was  long-suffering 


590  Orville  H.  Platt 

and  kind,  so  much  so  that  many  who  failed  to  under 
stand  his  spirit  of  forbearance  trespassed  upon  his 
patience  with  impunity. 

His  personal  attachments  were  deep  and  tender. 
He  was  not  demonstrative  and  rarely  betrayed  him 
self  except  at  times  in  writing  to  a  few  for  whom 
he  cared.  His  native  diffidence  restrained  him  from 
speaking  his  inmost  feelings,  so  that  some  regarded  him 
as  cold  and  distant  when  he  was  really  famishing  for 
human  sympathy;  but  there  was  a  gentle  insistence 
in  his  manner  more  eloquent  than  words,  when  in  the 
company  of  those  he  liked.  To  a  few — only  a  few — 
he  opened  up  his  heart.  "  I  get  tired  and  lonely  be 
cause  I  can  not  see  you,  and  feel  as  though  I  had  n't 
any  friends,"  he  writes  to  one  of  these,  and  "  Now  write 
me,  for  I  can't  endure  the  idea  that  I  am  forgotten. " 
In  eulogy  of  Charles  A.  Russell,  to  whom  he  was  close 
ly  attached  he  said:  "Parting  with  my  colleague,  my 
comrade,  and  my  dear  friend,  I  repeat  the  words  of 
David  when  he  mourned  for  Jonathan:  '  Very  pleasant 
hast  thou  been  unto  me ;  thy  love  to  me  was  wonderful, 
passing  the  love  of  woman.' ' 

He  was  subject  at  times  to  fits  of  depression  when  he 
felt  like  renouncing  his  dignities  and  going  back  to  the 
artless  existence  of  his  early  years.  These  spells  came 
on  him  often  during  the  last  days  of  an  exhausting 
session,  when  he  was  longing  for  the  solitude  of  the 
Adirondacks  or  the  restfulness  of  Judea.  "  I  am  like 
Elijah  under  the  juniper  tree, "  he  wrote  at  the  con 
clusion  of  his  work  on  the  Dingley  tariff  in  the  summer 
of  1897.  And  another  time  he  writes  with  a  whimsi 
cal  touch :  ' '  The  grasshopper  that  is  continually  hopping 
towards  me  looks  as  big  as  a  coach  team,  and  I  know 
will  be  a  burden  when  he  gets  to  me." 


vcf 


jj*[cl     .H    sHiviO    ol    teldfiT    khorr^M    -,ri 
nnuO  arb  ni  ..p^J  ,n^nf  m>V  .H  .H 


- 


5Qo  Orville  H.  Platt 

and  kind,  so  much  so  that  many  who  failed  to  under 
stand  his  spirit  of  forbearance  trespassed  upon  his 
patience  with  impunity. 

His  personal  attachments  were  deep  and  tender. 
He  was  not  demonstrative  and  rarely  betrayed  him 
self  except  at  times  in  writing  to  a  few  for  whom 
be  cared.  His  native  diffidence  restrained  him  from 
speaking  his  inmost  feelings,  so  that  some  regarded  him 
as  cold  and  distant  when  he  was  really  famishing  for 
human  sympathy;  but.  there  was  a  gentle  insistence 
in  his  manner  more  eloquent  than  words,  when  in  the 
company  of  those  he  liked.  To  a  few — only  a  few — 
he  opened  up  his  heart.  "  I  get  tired  and  lonely  be 
cause  I  can  not  see  you,  and  feel  as  though  I  had  n't 

1  Now  write 
The    Memorial    Tablet^  to  ,Orville    H.    Platt    placed    by 

E.  H.  Van  Ingen,  Esq.,  in  the  Gunn  Memorial 

L\J^\\  II      II  Xlc  VVclS  v-'i 

Library,  Washington,  Corm..  coueague)  my 

A.  Bertram  Pegram,  Sculptor 

'avid  when  he  mourned  fo;  Jonathan:  '  Very  pleasant 
hast  thou  been  unto  me;  thy  love  to  me  was  wonderful, 
passing  the  love  of  woman.' ' 

;ie  was  subject  at  times  to  fits  of  depression  when  he 
felt  like  renouncing  his  dignities  and  going  back  to  the 
artless  existence  of  his  early  years.  These  spells  came 
on  him  often  during  the  last  days  of  an  exhausting 
session,  when  he  was  longing  for  the  solitude  of  the 

dirondacks  or  the.  rest  fulness  of  Judea.     *'  I  am  like 
Elijah  under  the  juniper  tree,  "  he  wrote  at  the  con 
clusion  of  his  work  on  th<;  pingley  tariff  in  the  summer 
of  1897.     And  another  time  he  writes  with  a  whimsi 
cal  touch :  ' '  The  grasshopper  that  is  continually  hopping 
towards  me  looks  as  big  as  a  coach  team,  and  I  know 
vill  be  a  burden  when  he  gets  to  me." 


An  Old-Fashioned  Senator  591 

But  these  were  only  fleeting  phases.  His  habit 
was  to  look  on  life  with  cheerful  courage  and  serene 
philosophy. 

"More  and  more  I  see  that  contentment  is  great 
gain,"  he  writes  to  an  old  schoolmate;  and  again: 
"  Success  and  happiness  are  relative  terms,  and  day 
by  day  I  admire  more  and  more  the  comprehensive 
line  of  an  old  poet  of  the  sixteenth  century — '  My  mind 
to  me  a  kingdom  is." 

Of  his  political  aspirations  he  said : 

I  have  no  ambition.  If  the  people  of  Connecticut  want 
to  send  some  one  to  the  Senate  in  my  place  I  shall  not 
whimper  or  even  care.  I  only  want  to  go  on  while  I  have 
strength,  doing  what  there  is  for  me  to  do  as  well  as  I  can, 
and  whether  it  is  here  or  elsewhere — in  the  Senate  or  in 
some  quiet  cabin  by  the  way — makes  no  difference.  I  have 
no  high  notions  about  myself,  ask  for  nothing,  want  noth 
ing,  am  content.  I  think  I  have  that  much  philosophy. 

He  was  unaffectedly  religious,  though  from  his 
early  experience  among  the  excommunicated  Aboli 
tionists  of  Judea  it  was  not  to  be  expected  that  he 
would  be  straitly  bound  by  dogmas.  He  wrote  of 
his  old  teacher,  Mr.  Gunn,  that  "  he  loved  God,  loved 
man,  loved  truth;  and  he  served  God,  served  man, 
served  truth";  and  he  might  as  well  have  written  it 
of  himself.  He  was  reverent  in  all  things.  He  believed 
in  prayer  and  never  fell  asleep  without  one  on  his  lips. 
He  shrank  from  ceremony  and  was  not  a  stickler  for 
doctrines.  Though  a  member  of  the  Congregational 
Church  in  Meriden,  a  Bible-class  teacher,  and  a  deacon, 
he  was  not  tied  down  to  any  religious  denomination. 
During  his  later  years  he  usually  attended  the  Episco 
pal  Church,  both  in  Washington  and  Judea.  He  liked 


592  Orville  H.  Platt 

the  simplicity  and  directness  of  the  service,  which 
harmonized  with  his  religious  mood.  He  was  versed 
in  hymnology  and  knew  many  hymns  by  heart.  His 
favorite  was  "  Jesus,  the  very  thought  of  Thee. " 
That,  he  used  to  say,  was  the  real  Crusader's  hymn. 
The  Collect  of  which  he  was  most  fond  was  that 
for  the  ninth  Sunday  after  Trinity : 

Grant  to  us,  Lord,  we  beseech  Thee,  the  Spirit  to  think 
and  do  always  such  things  as  are  right ;  that  we,  who  cannot 
do  any  thing  that  is  good  without  Thee,  may  by  Thee  be 
enabled  to  live  according  to  Thy  will;  through  Jesus  Christ 
our  Lord. 

But,  after  all,  his  most  congenial  place  of  worship  was 
out-of-doors.  His  absorbing  passion  was  the  woods. 
Once  there  he  melted  into  the  environment  as  though 
he  had  never  dreamed  of  any  other  life.  He  was  con 
tinually  crying,  "  My  natural  home  is  in  the  woods, " 
and  "  I  long  more  and  more  for  the  hermit  life  of  the 
Adirondacks.  " 

To  one  who  understands  him  he  writes : 

I  am  at  home  with  the  woods  and  waters  and  mountains, 
and  it  seems  as  though  I  could  be  happy  there  where  I 
could  let  mind  as  well  as  body  go  to  sleep. 

And  to  another: 

When  we  go  to  the  Adirondacks  we  go  back  absolutely 
to  a  state  of  nature,  leaving  all  care  and  even  knowledge 
behind.  We  eat  and  sleep,  row  and  roam,  and  that  is  all. 
The  mind  rests  with  the  body. 

He  liked  old-fashioned  things,  read  old  books; 
studied  old  customs,  especially  those  relating  to  the 
early  days  of  New  England  and  Connecticut.  He 


An  Old-Fashioned  Senator  593 

found  relaxation  in  writing  about  incidents  of  early 
Connecticut  history.  He  prepared  papers  on  "  The 
Extinction  of  the  Meeting  House,"  "The  British 
Invasion  of  New  Haven  in  1779,"  the  "Encounter 
between  Roger  Griswold  and  Matthew  Lyon  in  1798, " 
and  the  quaint  custom  of  Negro  elections  and  the 
inauguration  of  Negro  governors  which  prevailed  in 
Connecticut  in  the  early  days  of  the  last  century. 
All  this  involved  a  lot  of  correspondence  and  hunting 
through  the  records,  but  he  liked  it,  and  his  papers 
now  have  an  historical  value  of  their  own.  He  was 
familiar  with  American  and  English  history,  knew  by 
heart  the  story  of  the  Revolution  and  the  proceedings 
of  the  Continental  Congress  and  the  Constitutional 
Convention;  was  fond  of  mousing  among  curious  old 
books,  well  known  in  their  time  but  little  considered 
nowadays,  the  names  of  the  authors  of  which  do  not 
appear  in  any  current  lists.  He  was  fond  of  archae 
ology.  He  read  everything  he  could  lay  hands  on 
relating  to  ancient  civilizations,  and  his  one  extrava 
gance  was  the  buying  of  rare  books  dealing  with  the 
customs  of  antiquity.  "  If  I  had  leisure  and  means, " 
he  once  said,  "  I  should  have  been  thoroughly  taken 
up  with  archaeological  investigations. "  One  thing 
that  helped  to  reconcile  him  to  the  drudgery  of  his 
work  on  the  Indian  Committee  was  that  it  brought 
him  close  to  the  customs  and  practices  of  the  abo 
riginal  inhabitants  of  America,  and  he  welcomed  the 
opportunity  to  pursue  inquiries  along  those  lines. 
He  was  pleased  when,  after  the  death  of  Senator  Morrill 
in  1899,  he  was  made  a  Regent  of  the  Smithsonian 
Institution,  and  he  was  deeply  interested  in  the  Institu 
tion  as  long  as  he  lived.  Its  officers  were  among  his 
most  valued  friends,  and  one  of  his  last  acts  was  to 
38 


594  Orville  H.  Platt 

help  secure  a  $4,000,000  appropriation  for  the  National 
Museum  in  1904,  which  will  be  a  lasting  monument 
to  him. 

He  had  no  knack  for  saving  money  and  was  generally 
indifferent  to  the  things  that  money  could  buy.  He 
accepted  his  financial  sacrifice  as  one  of  the  compensa 
tions  of  his  political  career,  though  as  time  wore  on 
he  could  not  help  regretting  that  he  had  not  laid  by 
enough  to  insure  a  comfortable  old  age,  and  indulging 
occasionally  in  a  half-humorous  protest  against  the 
privations  incident  to  life  in  Washington  without 
sufficient  means.  He  would  have  been  contented 
with  the  most  modest  income,  so  long  as  it  was  sufficient 
to  keep  him  from  anxiety  about  the  future.  "  I  am 
very  much  inclined  to  think, "  he  wrote  quizzically 
in  1897,  just  after  his  fourth  election  to  the  Senate, 
"that  if  I  had  an  annuity  of  $2000  I  would  let  some 
body  else  come  to  the  Senate  while  I  went  fishing. " 

He  had  a  dry  Yankee  humor  which  helped  to  save 
him  from  great  errors  and  served  him  in  his  gentle 
mastery  of  men,  so  that  he  seldom  erred  in  judging 
character  or  in  weighing  political  conditions.  He 
had  many  pat  illustrations,  though  he  rarely  told  a 
story;  but  he  could  enjoy  another's  story  or  a  humorous 
situation  as  keenly  as  any  man. 

His  sense  of  fitness  saved  him  from  frequent  "  inter 
views.  "  He  did  not  believe  in  announcing  his  position 
publicly  on  a  question  until  the  time  came  for  him  to 
speak  in  the  Senate  or  to  vote.  He  had  known  cases 
where  Senators  had  found  themselves  embarrassed 
by  declaring  themselves  on  questions  which  they  had 
not  thoroughly  studied,  and  he  did  not  intend,  if  he 
could  help  it,  to  be  caught  that  way;  yet  while  avoiding 
publicity  he  would  often  help  out  one  wrho  was  seeking 


An  Old-Fashioned  Senator  595 

light  by  elucidating  the  points  in  question  with  a 
comprehensiveness  and  clarity  which  few  men  in 
the  Senate  could  approach. 

He  had  a  high  conception  of  the  duty  of  a  Senator. 
His  great  respect  for  the  office  kept  him  from  inter 
fering  in  the  local  politics  of  Connecticut.  "  It  has 
always  seemed  to  me, "  he  said,  "  that  I  must  do  one 
of  two  things — try  to  be  a  boss  in  my  State  and  con 
trol  everything,  or  let  it  alone  and  try  to  be  a  Senator 
in  Washington  " ;  and  so  he  was  a  Senator  at  Washing 
ton  with  all  the  name  implies.  Sometimes  it  hit  him 
hard  to  be  loyal  to  his  idea.  Early  in  the  Roosevelt 
administration  his  own  son  became  an  applicant  for  ap 
pointment  to  the  Federal  Bench.  There  were  other  can 
didates  and  the  politicians  of  the  State  were  at  odds 
among  themselves.  It  was  a  trying  time  for  the  Sena 
tor.  A  word  from  him  would  settle  the  contest.  He 
had  not  known  his  son  would  be  a  candidate  until  the 
fight  was  on,  yet  his  affection  tugged  at  him  to  help 
the  younger  Platt  in  an  ambition  which  had  been 
cherished  for  years.  He  was  sick  with  worry  and 
took  to  his  bed,  but  he  let  his  distress  eat  out  his  heart 
and  would  not  lift  a  finger  to  influence  the  result. 
The  President  of  his  own  accord  decided  to  make  the 
appointment,  and  when  he  announced  it  he  added: 
"  Senator  Platt 's  conduct  in  this  affair  is  the  most 
unselfish  exhibition  of  conscientious  determination 
to  make  no  selfish  use  of  public  power  that  I  have  ever 
seen."  When  James  Platt  called  at  the  White  House 
to  thank  the  President,  he  was  greeted  with  the  hearty 
exclamation :  "  Your  father  is  the  whitest  man  I 
know! " 

Throughout  his  life  he  fashioned  his  conduct  after 
the  manner  of  one  who  believed  profoundly  in  the 


596  Orville  H.  Platt 

never  ending  influence  of  every  spoken  word  and  un 
spoken  thought.  That  was  a  sentiment  to  which  he 
often  gave  expression  as  when,  in  the  course  of  his 
tribute  to  Senator  Hoar,  he  said: 

I  am  one  of  those  who  believe  that  no  thought  conceived 
by  the  brain,  no  word  spoken  by  the  lips,  no  act  performed 
by  the  will,  has  ever  been  lost  or  ceases  to  exert  its  influ 
ence  upon  mankind.  No  thought,  word,  or  act,  of  the  high 
est,  the  lowest,  the  richest,  the  poorest,  the  best,  or  the 
worst  of  men  and  women  who  have  lived  on  earth  since 
the  days  when  mankind  became  socially  organized  has  ever 
been  wholly  effaced.  The  world  is  to-day  what  these 
thoughts,  words,  and  deeds  of  all  who  have  gone  before  us 
have  made  it. 

He  had  an  analytical  mind.  Things  did  not  come 
to  him  by  intuition.  He  had  to  think  out  a  proposition 
slowly  and  laboriously,  but  when  he  had  once  got  to 
the  root  of  it  he  was  conversant  with  every  argument 
and  had  examined  it  from  every  point  of  view.  There 
was  no  limit  to  his  courage  in  sustaining  a  position 
which  he  had  reached  by  plodding  processes  of  thought, 
yet  he  had  little  pride  of  opinion  and  saw  no  shame  in 
accepting  the  conclusions  of  others  when  once  con 
vinced  that  they  were  right,  or  in  acknowledging  his 
error  if  convinced  that  he  was  wrong.  His  mind  was 
always  open  to  new  light.  He  never  strove  for  popular 
applause  nor  cared  for  it  save  as  it  carried  the  presump 
tion  of  work  well  done.  He  was  not  indifferent  to 
praise  or  blame,  yet  he  never  sought  one  or  feared  the 
other.  He  was  strongly  moral,  pure  in  thought  as 
well  as  in  deed.  He  was  far-sighted,  shrewd,  and  wise ; 
of  sound  judgment,  broadly  human;  trustful  of  his 
friends;  guileless  in  a  way,  yet  unbeguilable.  In  spite 


An  Old-Fashioned  Senator  597 

of  his  gentleness  and  generosity  of  mind,  he  was  stern 
and  unyielding  in  advancing  what  he  knew  to  be 
right,  and  he  would  flame  with  anger  against  what  he 
felt  to  be  wrong.  No  one  was  ever  rash  enough  to 
approach  him  with  a  questionable  proposition,  and 
no  one  ever  hesitated  to  solicit  his  adherence  to  a 
righteous  cause.  In  twenty-five  years  of  service  in 
the  Senate,  he  had  gained  a  position  of  unquestioned 
authority,  growing  out  of  confidence  which  had  never 
been  betrayed. 

There  were  others  with  more  striking  qualities  of 
mind,  more  captivating  personality,  or  greater  faculty 
for  organized  control,  but  in  the  composite  traits  that 
go  to  make  the  ideal  Senator  no  other  was  quite  his 
equal.  His  word  went  a  little  farther  than  any  other, 
his  example  was  followed  more  frequently  with  implicit 
faith.  His  motive  was  never  questioned,  and  his 
judgment  was  always  held  in  unqualified  respect. 

In  the  minds  of  those  who  followed  legislation  closely 
for  the  quarter  of  a  century  during  which  he  served, 
he  was  the  most  useful  member  of  the  body  to  which 
he  belonged, — a  Senator  of  the  United  States  for  Con 
necticut,  without  fear  and  without  reproach. 


CHAPTER  XLVIII 

WORDS  FITLY  SPOKEN 

Tributes  by  his  Associates  in  Public  Life — Eulogies  in  the  Senate — 
Senator  Lodge's  Estimate  of  his  Character. 

WHEN  the  last  call  comes  to  a  man  who  has  held 
a  place  in  the  general  eye,  it  is  customary  for 
those  who  have  been  associated  with  him,  or  whose 
recognized  position  is  supposed  to  give  their  judg 
ment  weight,  to  set  down  their  estimates  of  his 
service.  This  is  a  formality  due  partly  to  convention 
and  partly  to  the  exigencies  of  public  prints,  so  that 
from  the  nature  of  the  case,  with  little  regard  to  per 
sonal  relations,  the  words  thus  spoken  are  uniformly 
commendatory. 

A  like  rule  holds,  though  in  less  degree,  with  editorial 
comment  at  the  moment,  before  the  time  arrives  for 
recording  the  impersonal  verdict  of  history. 

Of  such  perfunctory  eulogy  the  death  of  Senator 
Platt  evoked  the  usual  amount,  which  those  who 
knew  him  best  could  neither  take  exception  to  nor 
greatly  prize;  but  in  the  multitude  of  tribute  there 
was  some  which,  as  expressing  the  discriminating 
judgment  of  those  who  had  an  opportunity  for  intimate 
acquaintance  with  his  career,  may  properly  be  given 
permanence  in  a  sketch  which  aims  to  portray  the 
salient  features  of  his  character  and  life.  The  messages 
of  sympathy  which  winged  their  way  to  Kirby  Corner 

598 


Words  Fitly  Spoken  599 

abounded  in  expressions  of  love  and  unaffected  grief, 
as  well  as  of  respect. 

"  He  was  one  of  the  strongest,  gentlest,  noblest,  and 
most  lovable  men  I  ever  knew,  "  wrote  William  E. 
Chandler,  who  sat  at  the  adjoining  desk  in  the  Senate 
for  several  years.1 

Nelson  W.  Aldrich,  who  served  with  Mr.  Platt  on 
the  Finance  Committee  for  a  decade,  declared:  "I 
am  conscious  of  the  loss  of  a  dear  friend,  who  was  all 
in  all  the  best  man  I  ever  knew  " ;  and  this  sentiment 
he  reiterated  later  in  the  Senate. 

i  Mr.  Chandler  writes: 

"  Mr.  Platt  was  a  man  of  very  tender  feelings  of  friendship  toward 
his  intimates,  and  I  had  the  good  fortune  to  be  warmly  loved  by 
him. 

' '  I  was  with  him  alone  for  a  season  at  Long  Lake  in  the  Adiron- 
dacks,  and  our  intercourse  there  strengthened  our  mutual  affections. 

"  He  was  very  lonely  after  his  first  wife's  death,  I  think  even 
more  so  because  she  had  been  so  long  an  invalid. 

"  After  Senator  Merrill's  death  I  moved  my  seat  to  the  right  of  Mr. 
Platt,  on  the  front  row,  and  we  continued  together  until  I  left 
the  Senate. 

"He  was  constantly  making  affectionate  remarks.  One  day  he 
seemed  too  quiet  and  a  little  disconsolate,  and  I  began  talking 
cheeringly  to  him.  Shortly  he  said:  'I  need  more  affection.  Do 
you  love  me?'  My  reply  was,  'Of  course  I  love  you.'  But  he 
continued:  'Do  you  really  love  me?  Are  you  sure  you  love  me?' 
My  response  was  warm  enough  to  satisfy  one,  and  he  laid  his  hand 
on  mine  with  a  gentle  pressure  that  deeply  affected  us  both.  This 
incident  is  slight  and  it  is  impossible  to  reproduce,  in  words  alone, 
the  strong  desire  he  showed  for  my  affection  and  his  satisfaction 
with  what  I  could  truthfully  and  sincerely  assure  him. 

"  I  have  had  several  experiences — doubtless  more  than  my  share — 
of  reciprocal  affection  with  men  in  public  life,  all  disregarding 
sections  and  politics  and  heeding  not  mutual  mistakes  and  faults, 
and  I  place  my  relations  with  Mr.  Platt  very  near  to  the  head  of 
the  list. 

"  It  is  a  great  satisfaction  to  me  to  know  that  his  last  years  were 
brightened  and  his  affections  given  full  scope  and  reciprocated 
through  ideal  domestic  relations." 


6oo  Orville  H.  Platt 

William  B.  Allison,  a  fellow  Senator  for  twenty-six 
years,  wrote :  "I  know  of  no  one  who  will  be  as  much 
mourned  for  by  his  associates,  not  only  for  his  most 
considerate  and  kindly  qualities,  but  for  his  great  use 
fulness  to  his  country.  He  was  in  the  Senate  like 
the  mainspring  of  a  watch.  " 

Shelby  M.  Cullom  described  him  as  the  best  "  all 
around "  member  of  the  Senate.  "  Senator  Platt,  " 
he  wrote,  "  was  capable  in  more  ways  to  do  what  the 
exigencies  of  the  day  from  time  to  time  put  upon  him 
than  any  other  man  in  the  Senate.  .  .  .  His  judgment 
was  a  little  more  exactly  right  than  any  other 
Senator's.  " 

Others  who  had  been  associated  with  him  in  Wash 
ington  bore  testimony: 

William  H.  Taft:  The  country  which  he  loved  so 
well  has  lost  from  a  place  of  great  power  and  usefulness 
a  protector  and  defender  of  its  best  interests  whom  it 
could  ill  afford  to  lose.  He  stood  four-square  to  all 
the  winds  that  blew. 

John  C.  Spooner :  Those  of  us  who  knew  the  Senator, 
the  trend  of  the  times,  the  power  for  good  of  his  learn 
ing,  experience,  watchfulness,  and  conscience,  and  the 
great  part  he  played  in  council  and  in  action,  realize 
more  keenly  than  can  the  country  at  large  the  country's 
loss.  But  in  the  last  years,  with  all  his  modesty,  the 
country  had  grown  to  know  and  trust  him  as  a  great 
statesman,  and  the  knowledge  of  this,  testified  in  so 
many  ways,  must  have  been  an  unspeakable  comfort 
to  him. 

Elihu  Root :  He  will  always  live  in  my  memory  as 
one  of  the  purest  and  best  public  servants  whom  I 
have  ever  known. 

Edward  Everett   Hale:     He  could  not  know  how 


Words  Fitly  Spoken  601 

profound  was  the  regard  and  respect  in  which  I  held 
him.  I  had  not  the  honor  of  even  an  acquaintance 
with  him  until  I  became  Chaplain  of  the  Senate.  But 
then  his  welcome  and  kindness  to  me  were  constant. 
His  seat  was  close  to  the  steps  by  which  I  came  down 
from  the  desk,  every  day,  and  I  was  perhaps  apt  to 
catch  his  eye  and  kind  salute  more  often  than  that  of 
any  Senator.  More  than  once  he  asked  me  to  take 
his  seat  when  I  was  on  the  floor.  ...  I  was  almost 
always  present  at  the  sessions  of  the  impeachment. 
I  like  to  recall  now  the  dignity  with  which  he  clothed 
that  whole  proceeding,  in  his  position  of  president.  I 
am  sure  that  the  serious,  most  impressive  character 
which  he  gave  to  all  that  was  done  will  remain  as  a 
lesson  to  all  of  us. 

Charles  W.  Fairbanks:  He  was  level-headed  and 
courageous.  He  was  a  laborious  and  intelligent  stu 
dent,  yielding  his  judgment  only  to  the  best  reason. 
He  helped  fashion  some  of  the  most  important  laws 
enacted  by  Congress  during  the  last  quarter  of  a  cen 
tury.  I  know  of  no  one  who  was  a  safer  guide  than  he 
in  public  affairs.  There  was  no  one  who  more  than  he 
thoroughly  consecrated  himself  to  the  discharge  of 
his  public  duties.  He  was  able  and  as  modest  as  able. 

Leslie  M.  Shaw :  A  good  man  and  a  great  statesman, 
without  dissimulation  and  with  no  thought  of  guile. 
I  have  not  known  a  greater  statesman  than  Orville  H. 
Platt. 

Simeon  E.  Baldwin :  Senator  Platt  took  his  election 
to  the  Senate  not  as  a  reward  to  be  enjoyed,  but  as  an 
opportunity  to  be  made  the  most  of.  In  committee 
work  and  out  of  committee  he  was  a  faithful  worker. 
He  entered  on  old  age  without  claiming  its  privileges 
and  without  feeling  its  weaknesses.  I  am  inclined 


602  Orville  H.  Platt 

to  think  that  his  influence  was  greater,  his  position 
higher,  after  he  had  passed  the  age  of  seventy  than 
it  had  ever  been.  .  .  .  Such  a  life  makes  one  feel  how 
superior  is  the  individual  to  his  circumstances.  Nar 
row  means,  a  scanty  education,  hard  toil  on  a  rock 
farm — these  were  the  beginnings  from  which  Senator 
Platt  advanced  to  a  great  station,  to  fill  it  well.  .  .  . 
We  who  live  most  of  us  in  a  university  town,  most 
of  us  the  sons  of  the  university,  are  sometimes  in 
danger  of  over-estimating  what  a  university  can 
give.  It  can  not  give  talent  nor  supply  its  place. 
The  native  God-given  faculty  in  every  man  who  makes 
his  mark  has  been  his  best  inheritance.  It  is  of  an 
elevated  kind,  it  can  attract  education  to  itself,  like 
a  magnet,  whatever  be  the  course  of  life  he  may  pursue. 
It  was  so  that  Senator  Platt  became  his  own  teacher, 
and  from  his  youth  up  his  horizon  was  always  extend 
ing.  Such  men  may  well  do  their  best  work  last. 

In  the  eulogies  spoken  in  the  Senate  and  in  the  House 
a  year  after  his  death,  there  was  a  note  of  sincerity 
and  deep  feeling  which  made  the  occasion  memorable 
among  ceremonies  of  the  kind.  His  former  associates 
dwelt  not  only  upon  the  ability  of  Mr.  Platt  as  a  legis 
lator,  but  also  upon  his  personal  qualities,  his  unselfish 
ness,  his  faculty  of  co-operation,  his  capacity  for 
friendship. 

In  the  House  on  April  14,  1906,  the  speakers  were 
Sperry,  Hill,  Henry,  Higgins  and  Lilley  of  Connecticut, 
Sherman  arid  Payne  of  New  York,  Grosvenor  of  Ohio, 
and  Clark  of  Missouri. 

In  the  Senate  on  April  2 1  st  the  speakers  were  Bulkeley 
and  Brandegee  of  Connecticut,  Allison  of  Iowa,  Morgan 
of  Alabama,  Teller  of  Colorado,  Aldrich  of  Rhode 


Words  Fitly  Spoken  603 

Island,  Lodge  of  Massachusetts,  Daniel  of  Virginia, 
Perkins  of  California,  Nelson  of  Minnesota,  Beveridge 
of  Indiana,  and  Kean  of  New  Jersey. 

Thus,  men  representing  every  shade  of  political 
opinion  and  all  sections  of  the  country  bore  tribute. 

The  address  of  Senator  Lodge  was  so  discriminating 
and  disclosed  so  fine  an  appreciation  of  Mr.  Platt's 
character  that  it  is  given  here  in  its  entirety,  while 
significant  passages  have  been  selected  from  other 
eulogies. 

Address  of  Mr.  Lodge 

Mr.  President,  among  the -remarkable  men  who  framed 
the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  two  of  the  most 
conspicuous  were  Roger  Sherman  and  Oliver  Ellsworth, 
delegates  from  the  State  of  Connecticut.  To  them,  and 
particularly  to  the  former,  was  due  the  great  compromise 
which  preserved  the  power  of  the  States  in  the  new  sys 
tem  by  securing  to  them  equality  cf  representation  in  the 
Senate,  to  which  was  due,  more  than  to  any  other  one  con 
dition,  the  success  of  the  Philadelphia  Convention  and  its 
complete,  but  narrow,  escape  from  failure  and  defeat.  The 
provision  thus  adopted  in  regard  to  the  basis  of  representa 
tion  in  the  Senate  and  the  House  was  known  as  the  "  Con 
necticut  Compromise,"  in  honor  of  the  men  whose  skill, 
foresight,  and  ability  brought  it  into  existence.  Both 
Sherman  and  Ellsworth  subsequently  became  Senators 
and  helped  to  organize  the  new  Government  which  the 
Constitution  had  called  into  being.  To  Ellsworth,  who 
was  afterwards  Chief  Justice  and  one  of  the  commissioners 
who  made  the  peace  with  France,  we  also  owe  the  Judiciary 
act — a  law  which  has  so  long  withstood  the  test  of  time  and 
of  changing  conditions  that  it  seems  to-day  to  possess  al 
most  the  fixity  and  sanctity  of  the  Constitution  itself.' 

Neither  Sherman  nor  Ellsworth  was  a  brilliant  orator  like 
Patrick  Henry,  nor  a  great  administrator  and  leader  like 


604  Orville  H.  Platt 

Hamilton,  nor  a  consummate  party  chief  and  political 
manager  like  Jefferson.  They  were  public  men  of  large 
ability  and  strong  character,  pre-eminently  constructive 
statesmen  of  the  Hamiltonian  school  who  left  enduring 
monuments  of  their  wisdom  and  foresight  in  the  Constitu 
tion  which  they  helped  to  frame,  and  in  the  laws  which 
they  placed  upon  the  statute  book. 

Men,  however,  of  such  unusual  character  and  strong 
mental  qualities  as  Sherman  and  Ellsworth  leave  their 
mark  not  merely  upon  the  legislation  and  the  history  of 
their  time,  but  upon  the  minds  of  the  communities  in  which 
they  live,  a  very  lasting  memorial,  for  habits  of  mind,  al 
though  as  impalpable  as  air,  are  often  more  imperishable 
than  stone  or  bronze. 

"  Not  marble,  nor  the  gilded  monuments 
Of  princes  shall  outlive  the  powerful  rhyme" — 

said  the  greatest  of  all  poets.  The  rhyme  of  the  poet  is  but 
words,  words  are  but  the  thoughts  of  men  grown  articulate, 
and  yet  he  who  shapes  and  influences  the  thoughts  and 
imagination  of  men  leaves  in  his  due  proportion  a  monu 
ment  which  will  endure  when  iron  has  rusted  and  marble 
crumbled  away. 

The  community  which  produced  Sherman  and  Ells 
worth  was  naturally  extremely  apt  to  receive  the  impress 
of  their  influence,  and  these  two  men  stamped  themselves 
deeply  upon  the  modes  of  thought  and  upon  the  instinctive 
mental  attitude  toward  great  questions  of  the  people  of 
Connecticut  who  had  given  them  to  the  nation  and  to  the 
public  service.  Those  who  came  after  them  insensibly 
followed  the  path  their  great  predecessors  had  marked  out, 
and  although  questions  changed  and  new  issues  arose,  the 
habit  of  mind  and  mode  of  thought  remained  unaltered. 
Nature,  we  are  told,  is  careful  of  the  type,  no  matter  how 
indifferent  she  may  be  to  the  individual,  and  certain  it  is 
that  in  communities  of  strong  character  and  salient  qualities 


Words  Fitly  Spoken  605 

of  intellect  habits  of  thought  not  only  endure,  but  the  type 
is  reproduced.  The  type  may  not  be  continuous,  but  it  is 
almost  unfailingly  recurrent. 

It  always  seemed  to  me  as  I  watched  Senator  Platt, 
listened  to  his  speeches,  and  passed  in  my  relations  with 
him  from  acquaintance  to  friendship,  that  I  recognized 
in  him  the  qualities  and  the  statesmanship  of  Roger  Sher 
man  and  Oliver  Ellsworth.  When,  a  few  years  ago,  I  had 
occasion  to  make  a  study  of  Ellsworth's  career,  I  felt  sure 
that  I  understood  him  and  realized  what  manner  of  man 
he  was  because  I  knew  Senator  Platt. 

This  type,  which  I  had  thus  found  in  history  and  then 
met  in  daily  life,  is  as  fine  as  it  is  strong,  and  comes  out  as 
admirably  in  its  modern  exemplar  as  in  those  which  illus 
trated  the  great  period  of  Constitution  making  and  of  the 
upbuilding  of  the  National  Government.  Senator  Platt  was 
conspicuously  a  man  of  reserved  force  and  of  calm  reason. 
I  have  seen  the  calmness  disappear  in  the  presence  of  what 
he  believed  imported  either  evil  to  the  republic  or  wrong 
to  man,  but  I  never  saw  the  wisdom  of  his  counsels,  no 
matter  how  much  he  may  have  been  moved,  distorted  or 
disturbed.  Naturally  a  lover  of  all  the  traditions  of 
ordered  liberty  and  obedience  to  law  in  which  he  had  been 
reared,  and  which  were  ingrained  in  his  nature,  he  was  as 
far  removed  as  possible  from  the  stagnation  and  reactionary 
tendencies  which  too  often  injure  and  discredit  conserva 
tism.  Because  he  clung  to  that  which  was  good  was  never 
a  reason  with  him  for  resisting  change.  On  the  contrary, 
he  sought  and  urged  improvement  always.  The  service  he 
rendered  in  the  case  of  the  Copyright  law  was  but  one  in 
stance  among  many  of  his  well-directed  zeal  in  behalf  of 
civilization  and  of  an  enlightened  progress  which  should 
keep  pace  with  the  march  of  events.  His  mind  was  too 
constructive  ever  to  be  content  with  immobility  or  to 
accept  the  optimism  satirized  by  Voltaire,  that  "whatever 
is,  is  right. "  He  wished  to  make  the  world  better  and  the 
lives  of  men  happier,  and  he  knew  this  could  not  be  done 


6o6  Orville  H.  Platt 

by  doggedly  and  unreasoningly  resisting  all  change  and 
all  advances  merely  because  he  revered  the  principles  long 
ago  established  and  had  abiding  faith  in  the  foundations 
of  free  government  laid  deep  and  strong  by  the  fathers 
of  the  Republic.  In  nearly  all  the  important  legislation 
which  went  to  enactment  during  his  long  career  of  public 
service,  those  who  will  take  the  trouble  to  study  the  records 
will  find  the  sure  trace  of  his  unobtrusive  but  strong  and 
shaping  hand.  One  great  achievement  of  constructive 
statesmanship  which  is  not  only  fixed  among  our  laws, 
but  which  has  become  part  of  the  constitution  of  another 
country,  bears  his  honored  name.  Yet  there  are  many 
more  like  unto  it  and  scarcely  less  important  in  which  he 
bore  a  leading  part  or  which  were  due  to  him  alone  that 
have  no  name  attached  to  them  and  the  true  authorship 
of  which  will  only  be  revealed  to  the  future  student  of 
history  when  he  is  delving  for  material  among  the  dry  dust 
of  dead  debates. 

To  be  anonymous  in  his  work  was  much  more  charac 
teristic  of  Mr.  Platt  than  to  affix  his  signature  where  all  men 
might  read  it.  He  seemed  to  me  not  only  to  care  less  for 
self-advertising,  but  to  be  more  averse  to  it  than  almost 
any  public  man  I  ever  knew.  He  longed  for  results,  and 
was  finely  indifferent  when  it  came  to  the  partition  of  the 
credit  for  obtaining  them.  This  is  a  phase  of  mind,  a 
kind  of  personal  pride  and  self-respect,  not  unworthy  of 
consideration,  for  it  is  sufficiently  rare  in  these  days  of 
ours,  so  flooded  with  news  and  so  overwhelmed  by  easy 
printing.  I  do  not  think  Mr.  Platt  ever  reasoned  the 
matter  out  and  then  rested,  satisfied  that  lasting  fame  and 
a  place  in  the  history  of  the  time  had  no  relation  whatever 
to  the  noisy  notoriety  of  the  passing  hour,  with  its  deafen 
ing  clamors  ever  ringing  in  our  ears.  It  was  simply  part 
of  his  own  nature,  because  ostentation  in  all  its  forms  was 
distasteful  to  him  and  because  he  shrank  from  exhibiting 
himself,  his  emotions,  or  his  works  as  sedulously  as  some 
men  strive  to  avoid  anything  which  resembles  retirement 


Words  Fitly  Spoken  607 

or  privacy.  His  industry  was  unflagging,  and,  again,  in 
small  things  as  in  great,  in  defeating  a  doubtful  claim  as 
in  building  up  a  great  law,  he  sought  results  and  nothing 
else.  If  he  could  pass  the  measure  he  desired  he  was  more 
than  glad  to  dispense  with  making  a  speech.  If  he  could 
defeat  an  obnoxious  bill  by  an  objection,  or  throw  out  a  bad 
amendment  on  a  point  of  order,  he  was  quite  content  to 
avoid  debate;  but  if  debate  was  necessary,  he  was  as  for 
midable  as  a  lucid,  trained,  legal  mind,  coupled  with  full 
information  and  a  power  of  vigorous,  clear  statement, 
could  make  him.  He  was  thorough  in  all  he  undertook — 
as  effective  in  the  endless  complications  of  a  great  tariff 
as  in  guarding  against  the  perils  which  beset  our  Indian 
legislation.  Outside  this  chamber  his  services  to  the 
Indians,  and  to  the  good  name  and  credit  of  the  United 
States  in  its  dealings  with  those  difficult  and  helpless 
savages,  performed  during  many  years  of  unremitting 
toil  as  a  member  of  the  Committee  on  Indian  Affairs,  will 
never  be  rightly  valued  or  understood.  It  was  the  kind 
of  hard,  self-sacrificing  work  for  the  sake  of  the  right  and 
to  help  others  which  must  be  in  itself  and  in  the  doing 
thereof  its  own  great  and  sufficient  reward. 

I  have  tried  to  indicate  very  imperfectly  those  qualities 
which  seem  to  me  especially  to  distinguish  Senator  Platt  as 
a  statesman,  for  a  statesman  of  high  rank  he  most  certainly 
was.  But  I  am  well  aware  that  I  have  dwelt  almost 
exclusively  upon  his  effectiveness,  his  indifference  to  self- 
advertisement,  and  his  unremitting  pursuit  of  results,  and 
have  passed  by  many  of  the  qualities  which  went  to  make 
up  the  man  and  to  account  for  his  large  success.  His 
great  ability,  his  power  of  work,  his  knowledge,  his  sense 
of  justice,  his  fearlessness  in  the  battle  with  wrong,  his 
capacity  for  working  with  other  men,  were  all  con 
spicuous  in  Mr.  Platt,  and  all  necessary  to  the  distin 
guished  achievements  of  his  life.  He  possessed  also  a 
very  much  rarer  gift  in  his  complete  retention  of  that 
flexibility  which  is  so  apt  to  diminish  as  men  advance 


6o8  Orville  H.  Platt 

in  life.  The  mind,  like  the  muscles,  tends  to  stiffen  as 
we  grow  older,  and  only  too  frequently  no  effort  is  made 
to  avoid  the  consequent  rigidity.  Both  mind  and  muscle 
will  go  on  performing  most  admirably  the  particular 
functions  to  which  they  have  been  accustomed,  but  they 
both  alike  recoil  from  a  new  idea  or  an  unwonted  exertion. 
From  all  this  Mr.  Platt  was  extraordinarily  free.  Neither 
his  age  nor  his  natural  conservatism  hindered  the  move 
ments  of  his  mind  or  made  him  shrink  from  a  new  idea  or 
tremble  and  draw  back  from  an  unexpected  situation.  In 
the  last  ten  years  of  his  life  he  saw  sudden  and  vast  changes 
in  the  relations  of  the  United  States  to  the  rest  of  the  world 
and  in  our  national  responsibilities.  He  did  not  hide  from 
them  or  shut  his  eyes  and  try  to  repel  them.  He  met  the 
new  conditions  not  only  with  the  flexibility,  but  with  the 
keen  interest  of  youth,  while  at  the  same  time  he  brought 
to  the  solution  of  the  new  problems  all  the  wisdom  of  a 
long  experience.  He  did  not  turn  away  with  dark  fore 
bodings  from  the  startling  changes  which  the  rush  of  hurry 
ing  events  swept  suddenly  upon  us,  but  confronted  them 
with  a  cheerful  heart,  a  smile  upon  his  lips,  and  a  firm  faith 
in  the  future  of  his  people  and  of  his  country. 

"We  knew  him  not?     Ah,  well  we  knew 
The  manly  soul,  so  brave,  so  true, 
The  cheerful  heart  that  conquered  age, 
The  child -like  silver-bearded  sage." 

A  very  fine  public  career  ended  when  Senator  Platt  died. 
In  him  we  lost  a  statesman  of  a  type  which  the  country 
can  ill  spare,  a  thorough  American  type  which  we  may  well 
pray  to  have  sustained  and  renewed  among  us.  It  is  not 
a  type  which  certain  ephemeral  defamers,  just  now  very 
vocal,  admire;  but  it  is  to  statesmen  of  this  precise  kind 
and  stature  that  we  owe  in  largest  measure  the  foundation 
and  organization  of  our  Government  and  the  ordered  liberty 
and  individual  freedom  which  have  made  the  United  States 


Words  Fitly  Spoken  609 

what  it  is  to-day.  Senator  Platt  was  a  man  who  was  at 
once  an  honor  to  the  country  which  he  served  and  guided 
and  a  vindication  of  our  faith  in  a  government  of  the  people 
who  chose  him  as  representative  of  themselves. 

I  have  spoken  of  Senator  Platt  only  as  a  public  man. 
But  to  us  here  his  death  is  much  more  than  a  public  loss. 
He  was  our  friend.  Those  who  come  after  us  will  know  of 
his  public  services,  of  the  work  he  did,  of  the  large  place 
he  filled  in  the  history  of  the  time;  but  we  also  remember, 
and  shall  never  forget,  the  honesty  of  heart  and  mind,  the 
simplicity  and  purity  of  life,  the  humor,  the  love  of  books 
and  sound  learning,  and,  above  all,  the  kindness  which 
never  failed  and  the  loyalty  which  never  faltered.  Others 
may,  with  full  faith  in  the  destiny  of  the  republic,  we  can 
confidently  say,  others  will  come  to  take  up  and  carry  on 
the  public  work  to  which  his  life  was  given,  but  the  place 
which  the  tried  and  trusted  friend  has  left  empty  in  our 
affections  can  not  again  be  filled. 

Mr.  Bulkeley 

The  dignity  of  his  presence  always  gave  an  added  interest 
to  the  gatherings  of  the  people,  the  earnestness  of  his  man 
ner  commanded  the  close  attention  of  his  hearers,  and  the 
moral  lessons  which  he  never  failed  to  inculcate,  and  the 
influence  of  a  godly  Christian  character,  which  he  deemed 
so  essential  to  the  welfare  of  society  and  for  which  his  own 
personal  life  was  so  conspicuous,  furnished  ample  food  for 
thought  and  reflection. 

The  people  of  Connecticut  never  failed  in  their  confidence 
or  loyalty  to  their  Senator.  His  whole  public  life  of 
untiring  industry,  sterling  integrity,  and  devotion  to  duty 
realized  their  expectations  when  they  selected  him  from 
their  own  ranks  to  represent  them  in  the  council  chamber 
of  the  nation,  and  confirmed  his  own  declaration  at  the 
outset  of  his  Senatorial  life:  "  I  shall  try  to  do  right  as  I 
see  the  right." 

39 


6io  Orville  H.  Platt 

Senator  Platt  rounded  out  his  service  in  this  body  as 
Chairman  of  the  Judiciary  Committee  of  which  he  had 
previously  been  a  member,  and  as  your  presiding  officer  on 
one  of  those  rare  occasions  in  the  history  of  our  country 
that  this  Senate  has  been  called  upon  to  exercise  its 
constitutional  judicial  functions.  His  work  of  accomplish 
ment  ended  with  the  Fifty-eighth  Congress  and  the  short 
executive  session  that  followed.  He  closed  his  great  career 
with  an  unsullied  record  and  reputation,  the  peer  of  the 
honored  Connecticut  Senators,  Ellsworth,  Sherman,  John 
son,  Trumbull,  Buckingham,  and  others  who  preceded 
him. 

His  last  public  act  was  to  participate  in  the  legislative 
memorial  exercises  at  the  State  Capitol,  in  Hartford,  in 
memory  of  his  long-time  friend  and  colleague;  friends 
when  "creeds  could  not  bind  the  consciences  of  such  men. 
They  found  a  law  higher  than  creeds;  they  inquired  only 
their  duty  to  God  and  man,  and  did  their  duty  as  they 
saw  it." 

His  none  too  rugged  frame  had  wearied  in  its  work,  the 
throbbing  heart  pulse  was  to  him  the  prophetic  warning 
of  a  near  reunion  and  renewed  activities  in  the  life  beyond, 
as  he  depicted  in  loving,  tender  words  his  graceful  tribute  to 
the  life  and  character  of  Connecticut's  idol  soldier  and 
statesman  that  had  already  entered  into  the  new  life;  it 
was  a  "Good-by"  and  not  a  farewell. 

The  needed  rest  and  recreation  he  sought  in  his  home  in 
his  native  town,  "little  Washington, "  as  he  would  designate 
it,  but  the  coveted  rest  never  came  until  "he  slept  with 
the  fathers." 

He  had  honorably  filled  his  own  place  both  in  private 
and  public  life,  and  left  behind  an  imperishable  name  to 
illumine  the  annals  of  his  State  and  nation.  He  had  fought 
the  good  fight  and  kept  the  faith ;  with  an  unclouded  mind, 
with  a  characteristic  faith,  and  an  undimmed  eye  he  had 
seen  in  an  awakening  vision 


Words  Fitly  Spoken  611 

"An  angel,  writing  in  a  book  of  gold; 
Exceeding  peace  had  made  him  (Ben  Adhem)  bold, 
And  to  the  presence  in  his  room  he  said : 
'  What  writest  thou  ? '     The  vision  raised  its  head 
And  with  a  look  made  all  of  sweet  accord 
Answer'd:  'The  names  of  those  who  love  the  Lord.' 
'And  is  mine  one?'  said  he  (Adhem).     'Nay,  not  so,' 
Replied  the  angel.     He  spoke  more  low, 
But  cheerily  still,  and  said:  'I  pray  thee,  then, 
Write  me  as  one  who  loves  his  fellow-men.' 
The  angel  wrote  and  vanished.     The  next  night 
It  came  again,  with  a  great  wakening  light, 
And  show'd  the  names  whom  love  of  God  had  bless'd, 
And  lo!  his  (Ben  Adhem' s)  name  led  all  the  rest." 

He  fell  asleep 

April  twenty-first,  nineteen  hundred  and  five, 
Washington,  Connecticut. 

Mr.  Brandegee 

He  was  a  leader.  He  did  not  lead  because  he  tried  to 
lead,  but  because  the  people  followed  him.  He  did  not 
lead  because  he  pretended  to  be  the  special  friend  of  the 
people,  as  demagogues  are  wont  to  do,  but  because  he 
laid  his  course  by  his  own  compass,  and  that  compass 
always  pointed  to  the  true  pole.  .  .  .  He  was  no  theorist. 
He  was  not  a  doctrinaire.  He  had  none  of  the  traits  of 
the  visionary  or  the  mystic.  He  dreamed  no  dreams  and 
he  pursued  no  chimeras.  He  insisted  upon  the  facts.  He 
was  virile  and  powerful,  mentally  and  physically.  His 
appearance  was  most  impressive.  He  was  cast  in  the 
patriarchal  mould.  He  towered  to  a  height  of  six  feet  and 
four  inches,  and  his  frame  and  head  were  as  massive  and 
rugged  as  the  granite  ledges  and  crags  of  his  native 
Litchfield  County. 

His  features  were  large  and  somewhat  furrowed,  and 
to  those  who  saw  him  for  the  first  time  his  countenance  was 
apt  to  convey  a  suggestion  of  austerity.  But  this  effect 


612  Orville  H.  Platt 

was  relieved  by  the  saving  grace  of  a  delicious  sense  of 
humor  and  an  inimitable  twinkle  of  the  eye.  His  manner 
was  deliberate,  and  he  was  well  balanced  and  at  all  times 
perfectly  self -controlled.  He  was  patient,  industrious, 
kindly,  cautious,  and  sound.  He  was  pre-eminently  safe 
and  sane.  His  judgment  was  excellent  and  his  gift  of 
common  sense  approached  to  genius.  His  temperament 
was  judicial,  and  he  clearly  perceived  and  carefully  weighed 
every  phase  of  a  question.  With  his  clear  vision  he  pene 
trated  the  heart  of  every  problem  and  discriminated  with 
unerring  precision  between  the  vital  principles  upon  which 
a  correct  solution  depended  and  the  irrelevant  and  delusive 
matters  which  confuse  other  minds.  He  was  possessed 
of  an  intuitive  sense  as  to  the  wisest  course  to  pursue, 
which  was  so  accurate  as  to  amount  almost  to  prescience. 
He  despised  shams,  hypocrisy,  and  pretence.  He  was 
straightforward,  sincere,  and  reliable.  He  was  a  man 
of  sterling  integrity,  and  was  as  honest  with  himself  as 
with  his  fellows.  It  was  as  impossible  to  deceive  him  as 
it  was  for  him  to  attempt  to  deceive  others.  He  was 
inspired  with  high  ideals  and  was  endowed  with  a  deep 
religious  nature.  His  logical  mind  moved  with  the  mathe 
matical  accuracy  of  an  adding  machine,  and  the  most  com 
plicated  questions  were  reduced  and  clarified  in  the  fervent 
crucible  of  his  intellectual  analysis.  He  was  intensely 
human  and  was  always  glad  to  cloak  the  faults  of  others 
with  the  broad  mantle  of  charity.  He  was  passionately 
fond  of  nature.  The  sound  of  the  brooks  tumbling  down 
their  rocky  beds,  the  rustle  of  the  leaves  in  the  woods,  the 
songs  of  birds,  the  voices  of  the  wild  things,  the  variegated 
tints  of  the  foliage,  the  odors  of  flower  and  fern  and  moist 
glade,  the  sunshine  and  shadow,  the  dying  monarch  of  the 
forest  and  the  springing  bud,  the  sunset  skies,  the  majesty 
of  the  snow-capped  mountain,  the  abyss  of  the  dark  canyon, 
the  rolling  prairie,  the  river  sweeping  away  into  the  dis 
tance,  the  vast  and  heaving  ocean — all  these  spoke  to  him 
in  a  language  of  music  and  poetry  to  which  every  fibre 


Words  Fitly  Spoken  613 

of  his  soul  was  attuned  and  to  which  it  responded  with 
joy  and  gratitude. 

Among  all  the  honors,  the  battles,  and  the  triumphs  of 
his  life,  continued  far  beyond  the  threescore  years  and  ten 
allotted  by  the  Psalmist,  the  home  of  his  boyhood  and  the 
wild  scenery  and  stalwart  people  of  his  native  Litchfield 
County  lay  closest  to  his  heart.  In  the  free,  open  air  of 
this  beautiful  section,  as  he  whipped  the  brooks  and  hunted 
its  game,  he  developed  that  magnificent  character  which 
never  knew  a  stain  and  that  splendid  courage  which  never 
surrendered  a  principle.  Here  he  imbibed  that  wholesome 
nature,  that  childlike  faith,  that  moral  standard  and 
stamina,  that  indomitable  will,  that  fine  perception,  that 
shrewd  insight,  that  independence  and  love  of  personal 
liberty,  which  made  him  a  tower  of  strength  and  a  very 
present  help  in  time  of  trouble. 

Mr.  President,  in  the  death  of  Senator  Platt  Connecticut 
lost  her  ablest  and  most  distinguished  public  servant,  this 
body  one  of  its  wisest  and  most  trusted  counsellors,  and 
the  nation  one  of  its  soundest  statesmen.  He  always  dared 
to  act  as  he  believed.  He  never  compromised  with  ex 
pediency.  He  was  a  great  man — in  stature,  in  brain,  in 
character,  in  influence,  in  deeds,  and  in  righteousness. 

Mr.  Beveridge 

All  who  knew  him  intimately  were  agreed  that  the 
amazing  youthfulness  of  his  mind  was  by  far  his  most 
notable  mental  characteristic.  Old  as  he  was,  he  attacked 
new  problems  with  the  eager  strength  of  young  manhood's 
mental  vitality,  solved  them  with  young  manhood's  faith. 
He  never  doubted  the  wisdom,  righteousness,  and  power 
of  the  American  people.  He  believed  devoutly,  unques- 
tioningly  in  their  mission  and  destiny  in  the  world.  Who 
that  heard  will  ever  forget  his  instantaneous  and  unpre 
pared  reply  to  the  venerable  Senator  from  Massachusetts 
on  our  duty  in  the  Philippines  and  our  certain  future  in 


6i4  Orville  H.  Platt 

the  Orient  and  the  world  ?  How  like  a  prophet  of  the  olden 
time  he  seemed  that  evening,  as  with  eyes  glowing  with 
religious  fire  and  voice  ringing  trumpet -clear  as  the  voice 
of  youth,  he  delivered  with  passionate  earnestness  that 
inspired  speech.  ...  It  was  with  this  youthful  vigor, 
vision,  and  undoubtingness  that  Senator  Platt  solved  the 
Cuban  question.  There  was  no  precedent.  He  made 
one.  Ordinary  intelligence  can  cite  precedents  and  apply 
decided  cases  to  like  situations.  It  needs  greatness  to 
create  by  sheer  thought  solutions  of  unheard-of  problems. 
And  that  is  what  Senator  Platt  did  in  the  immortal  Platt 
Amendment,  which,  written  in  our  statutes  and  incor 
porated  in  the  Cuban  constitution,  established  over  that 
island  the  indestructible  suzerainty  of  the  republic — all 
for  the  good  and  safety  of  the  Cuban  and  the  American 
people  alike.  ...  It  was  nothing  to  him  that  men  should 
remember  or  observe  what  he  said  or  did ;  it  was  everything 
to  him  that  his  word  and  deed  accomplished  something  for 
his  country.  And  so  he  was  fearless  and  pure  and  wise 
and  brave ;  his  life  without  stain,  his  course  without  varia 
bleness  or  shadow  of  turning.  It  was  this  conception  of 
duty,  vitalizing  and  consecrating  his  great  intellect,  that 
made  him  the  ideal  statesman  of  the  American  people. 

Mr.  Aldrick 

.  .  .  He  was  simple  and  just  by  nature,  able,  intelligent, 
courageous,  and  wise  with  the  wisdom  that  dominates 
and  controls. 

Although  he  was  by  nature  intensely  practical  and  shrank 
instinctively  from  anything  like  pretence  and  cant,  yet 
in  thought  and  action  he  always  adopted  the  highest 
possible  standards  and  invariably  followed  the  highest 
ideals.  I  venture  the  assertion  that  no  man  ever  held  a 
membership  in  the  Senate  who  had  to  a  greater  extent  the 
confidence  and  esteem  of  his  associates  than  the  late 
Senator  Platt. 


Words  Fitly  Spoken  615 

I  can  not  refrain  from  saying  a  few  words  with  reference 
to  our  personal  relations.  The  fact  that  we  represented 
adjoining  States,  whose  industries  and  material  interests 
were  practically  identical,  was  not  the  cause,  but  rather 
an  incident  to  our  warm  personal  friendship.  Throughout 
its  existence  there  was,  on  my  part,  a  constant  growth  of 
admiration  and  affection  for  the  man.  In  every  phase  of 
my  work  here  I  found  his  counsel  most  helpful.  In  his 
death  I  am  conscious  of  the  loss  of  a  dear  friend,  who  was, 
all  in  all  the  best  man  I  ever  knew. 

Mr.  Morgan 

His  forceful,  successful,  and  controlling  leadership  in  the 
Senate,  without  any  manifestation  of  ambitious  impulses 
or  purposes,  signalizes  Senator  Orville  H.  Platt  as  being 
a  model  American  Senator,  whose  example,  now  that  he  is 
gone,  is  worth  nearly  as  much  to  the  Senate  and  the  country 
as  his  unfailing  labors  were  worth  while  he  lived.  .  .  . 

Senator  Platt  was,  in  outward  seeming,  to  those  who 
did  not  know  the  shrinking  modesty  of  his  nature,  a  man 
of  marble,  cold  and  polished  in  statuesque  dignity,  with 
little  love  for  his  kind.  In  fact,  he  was  so  tender  a  lover 
of  all  who  were  suffering  affliction  or  were  in  danger  of  the 
visitations  of  wrong  and  injustice  that  his  chief  joy  in  life 
was  in  giving  them  comfort  and  strength  and  in  lifting 
their  hopes  above  despair. 

Mr.  Nelson 

.  .  .  He  was  trusted  and  relied  upon  in  every  great 
legislative  emergency,  for  his  wisdom  and  conservatism 
were  so  pronounced  and  so  familiar  to  all.  He  was  the 
fairest  legislator  I  have  ever  met,  modest  and  without  any 
personal  pride.  It  sometimes  happened,  though  less  often 
than  with  other  men,  that  he,  in  the  first  instance,  might 
misjudge  or  misapprehend  the  merits  of  a  measure,  but  if 
he  did,  he  was  ever  ready  to  be  corrected,  and  when 


6i6  Orville  H.  Platt 

convinced  of  his  mistake  he  was  not  merely  content  to 
acknowledge  the  mistake,  but  he  became  zealous  to  make 
full  amends,  and  this  was  a  trait  that  endeared  him  to  so 
many  of  his  associates.  .  .  . 

The  moral  influence  of  Senator  Platt  was  even  greater 
than  his  intellectual  force  and  power.  He  impressed 
every  one  who  came  in  contact  with  him  that  he  was  ac 
tuated  by  the  highest  and  noblest  motives  in  all  his  efforts. 
No  one  ever  questioned  or  doubted  his  honesty,  his  in 
tegrity,  and  the  purity  of  his  motives.  There  was  a  serene 
calmness,  coupled  with  clearness  and  earnestness,  in  his 
deliberations  and  in  his  speeches.  He  was  no  legislative 
specialist  with  only  a  single  hobby  or  a  single  line  of  work. 
He  was  equipped  for  and  devoted  to  every  great  line  of 
legislative  work  in  a  greater  measure  than  most  of  his 
colleagues;  and  above  all  he  gave  his  entire  heart  and 
energy  to  the  work  in  hand.  All  that  was  his  he  gave  to  his 
country  with  a  whole  heart  and  without  any  reservation. 

Mr.  Perkins 

We  all  know1  the  singleness  of  purpose  with  which  he 
grappled  with  all  great  questions.  The  patient  study  that 
he  devoted  to  them  was  for  the  sole  purpose  of  arriving 
at  the  truth,  for,  like  the  trained  scientist,  he  knew  that 
truth  alone  will  make  a  stable  foundation  for  legislation, 
and  that  without  truth  at  the  bottom  all  legislation  is 
worse  than  the  falsehood  on  which  it  is  based.  This  was 
the  cause  of  that  laborious,  patient,  unceasing  study  of 
financial,  social,  and  political  problems  which  come  before 
us  for  solution,  and  was  the  means  of  storing  his  mind  with 
facts  which  served  as  signposts  on  the  road  to  that  goal 
which  he  always  sought — the  best  interests  of  the  people 
of  the  United  States.  It  was  this  quality  of  thoroughness 
which  made  him  a  guide  in  whom  all  could  place  confidence 
and  whom  we  could  follow  with  the  assurance  that  we  could 
not  go  far  astray.  I  think  every  Senator  will  say  that 


Words  Fitly  Spoken  617 

during  his  service  here  with  Orville  H.  Platt  he  has  ob 
served  no  one  of  his  colleagues  who  was  so  vigilant  in 
watching  the  course  of  legislation,  so  sure  to  discover 
dangers,  and  so  prompt  to  apply  remedies. 

Mr.  Sperry 

His  modesty  and  his  retiring  disposition  stood  in  his 
way.  He  cared  nothing  for  the  transient  fame  that  most 
men  strive  for.  He  sought  and  obtained  the  high  regard 
of  his  own  colleagues,  the  best  judges  of  his  ability.  So 
when  the  serious  problems  growing  out  of  the  Spanish 
War  confronted  us,  especially  with  regard  to  the  future  of 
Cuba,  it  was  no  surprise  to  those  who  had  watched  Senator 
Platt  for  twenty  years  to  find  that  upon  him  devolved  the 
task  of  solving  the  complex  question  of  our  relations  with 
the  island  of  Cuba.  .  .  .  Throughout  his  busy  life  he 
continued  the  even  tenor  of  his  way,  looking  always  straight 
ahead,  never  caring  one  iota  for  public  praise  or  censure. 
He  knew  he  always  did  his  duty  as  he  saw  it,  and  he  felt 
confident  the  people  who  showered  political  honors  upon 
him  would  rightly  estimate  the  spirit  and  value  of  his 
work.  And  they  did. 

Mr.  Hill 

When  the  Republic  of  Hawaii  was  organized,  the  first 
Minister  to  this  country  chanced  to  be  a  personal  friend 
of  mine.  Soon  after  his  arrival  at  Washington  he  asked 
me  to  procure  an  interview  for  him  with  the  senior  Senator 
from  Connecticut.  On  Senator  Platt's  suggestion  the 
interview  was  held  in  a  closed  carriage  on  that  same  even 
ing,  and,  as  the  driver  wandered  aimlessly  for  nearly  three 
hours  about  the  streets  of  Washington,  inside  of  that 
carriage  questions  were  put  and  answers  given,  policies 
discussed  and  conclusions  reached,  which  ultimately 
brought  Hawaii  under  the  sovereignty  of  the  United  States 
as  an  organized  Territory. 


6i8  Orville  H.  Platt 

Leaving  the  Minister  at  his  home,  I  took  the  Senator  to 
his  hotel,  and  as  he  stepped  from  the  carriage  he  said: 
"I  guess  the  time  has  come  when  we  must  think  about 
entering  upon  some  form  of  a  colonial  system."  From 
that  day  the  one  absorbing  thought  of  his  life  was  the  rela 
tion  which  the  United  States,  the  dominant  power  of  the 
Western  Hemisphere,  should  hold  to  the  weaker  continen 
tal  powers  and  the  islands  in  the  two  oceans  which  wash 
our  shores;  and  when  a  little  later  the  war  with  Spain  had 
thrown  upon  us  the  responsibility  of  Cuba,  Porto  Rico,  and 
the  Philippines,  and  statesmen  doubted  as  to  the  right  of 
a  representative  republic  to  hold  control  and  sovereignty 
of  unrepresented  peoples,  he  demonstrated  beyond  cavil 
or  dispute,  in  a  speech  of  wonderful  simplicity  but  mar 
vellous  strength,  that  the  United  States  possessed  in 
herently,  as  well  as  under  its  Constitution,  all  of  the  rights 
and  powers  pertaining  to  any  absolutely  independent 
sovereign  nation.  The  Platt  Amendment  to  the  Cuban 
constitution  was  only  a  practical  application  of  the  prin 
ciples  enunciated  in  the  earlier  speech,  and  it  is  entirely 
safe  to  say,  that  as  Abraham  Lincoln  demonstrated  to 
the  world  the  right  of  the  republic  to  preserve  its  own 
life  against  attacks  from  within,  so  it  is  due  to  Orville  H. 
Platt,  as  much  as  to  any  other  one  man,  that  the  United 
States  stands  forth  among  the  powers  of  the  world  to-day 
the  equal  of  any  in  every  right,  in  every  privilege,  in  every 
degree  and  kind  of  sovereignty,  and  lacking  in  no  respect 
in  any  prerogative  enjoyed  or  claimed  -by  any  other.  If 
he  had  done  nothing  else  but  this  in  his  twenty-six  years  of 
service  in  the  Senate,  he  would  have  left  his  imprint  on 
the  history  of  his  time. 


APPENDIX 
I 

MEMORIAL     RESOLUTIONS     ADOPTED     BY    THE     CONNECTICUT 

GENERAL    ASSEMBLY    AT    THE   JANUARY    SESSION 

NINETEEN    HUNDRED    AND    FIVE 

Resolved,  by  this  Assembly,  That  in  the  death  of  ORVILLE 
H.  PLATT  the  people  of  this  State  experience  a  heartfelt 
grief,  and  are  deeply  sensible  of  the  loss  which  they  have 
thereby  sustained. 

In  his  removal  from  us,  the  State  has  been  deprived  of 
the  services  of  a  tried  and  faithful  public  servant,  who  has 
discharged  with  conspicuous  ability  the  onerous  duties 
that  for  more  than  a  quarter  of  a  century  have  rested  upon 
him  as  a  Senator  in  the  Congress  of  the  United  States  from 
this  Commonwealth. 

Throughout  his  long  public  service,  both  in  the  positions 
of  honor  and  trust  to  which  he  was  called  by  his  constitu 
ents  before  being  chosen  by  the  people  of  Connecticut  to 
represent  them  in  the  United  States  Senate,  and  during 
his  continuous  service  in  that  body  for  twenty-six  years  last 
past,  by  virtue  of  five  consecutive  elections  to  the  post  of 
honor,  he  has  ever  been  true  to  every  trust  reposed  in  him. 

His  attainment  to  the  highest  plane  of  true  statesman 
ship,  by  unselfish  and  patriotic  effort  and  unwavering  fidel 
ity  to  the  public  interest,  earned  universal  recognition  and 
praise  from  the  country  at  large,  and  has  reflected  credit 
and  honor  upon  this  State. 

Connecticut  people,  especially,  have,  with  ever  increasing 
appreciation,  followed  his  course  of  steady  and  substantial 

619 


620  Orville  H.  Platt 

growth  and  development  to  the  commanding  position  of 
influence  which  he  exercised  at  the  seat  of  government. 

The  feeling  of  our  people  towards  Orville  H.  Platt,  as 
in  his  advanced  years  he  still  bore  the  heat  and  burden 
of  the  day  in  the  discharge  of  his  responsible  duties  cannot 
be  measured  by  that  of  mere  appreciation  and  respect,  but 
was  and  is  more  akin  to  love ;  and  the  memory  of  his  simple 
and  winning  personality,  and  his  earnest  devotion  to  the 
interest  of  the  State  and  of  the  country  will  long  linger  in 
the  memory  of  a  grateful  people. 

Resolved,  That  this  resolution  be  engrossed,  and  that 
a  copy  thereof  be  sent  to  the  family  of  the  deceased  Senator, 
and  that  this  resolution  be  printed  in  the  journals  of  the 
Senate  and  the  House  of  Representatives. 


Attest: 


ALFRED  B.  BALDWIN, 
JOHN  A.  SPAFFORD, 

Clerks. 


II 


MESSAGE     OF     GOVERNOR     ROBERTS     ANNOUNCING     TO     THE 
GENERAL     ASSEMBLY     THE     DEATH     OF     MR.     PLATT 

It  is  my  sad  duty  to  notify  you  of  the  death  on  Friday 
evening,  April  2ist,  at  Washington,  Conn.,  of  Senator 
Orville  Hitchcock  Platt,  thereby  causing  a  vacancy  in  the 
representation  of  the  State  of  Connecticut  in  the  United 
States  Senate. 

The  death  of  Senator  Platt  is  a  loss  to  this  State  and  to 
this  nation.  Connecticut  mourns  a  representative  in 
Congress  whom  she  has  honored  and  trusted,  and  our 
common  country  will  miss  a  valued  counsellor,  an  unselfish 
public  servant,  and  a  wise  statesman. 

Senator  Platt  was  born  in  the  town  in  which  he  died, 
July  19,  1827.  Our  common  schools  provided  him  a  means 


Appendix  621 

of  education  and  an  able  lawyer  of  his  own  county  prepared 
him  for  admission  to  the  Bar  of  this  State. 

Immediately  upon  his  entrance  on  the  active  duties  of 
his  profession  he  was  called  by  his  fellow  townsmen  in 
Meriden  to  serve  them  as  Judge  of  its  Probate  Court. 

In  1855  he  was  elected  Clerk  of  the  Connecticut  Senate;  in 
1857,  Secretary  of  the  State;  1861-2,  State  Senator;  in  1864 
and  in  1869,  Representative  in  the  Legislature,  serving  in 
the  latter  year  as  Speaker  of  the  House,  and  in  1877  he  was 
appointed  State's  Attorney  for  New  Haven  County. 

In  all  these  positions  he  displayed  the  qualities  of  lead 
ership,  high- minded  purpose,  and  a  personal  character  which 
won  him  the  respect  of  all  whom  he  served.  He  became 
recognized  as  a  wise  man  to  follow  and  a  safe  man  to  trust. 

In  the  year  1879  he  was  elected  to  the  office  of  represen 
tative  of  the  State  of  Connecticut  in  the  Senate  of  the  United 
States.  In  1885,  1891,  1897,  and  1903  he  was  re-elected 
to  this  high  office  by  the  General  Assembly  of  this  State. 

For  these  honors  which  this  State  took  pleasure  in  giving 
him,  he  returned  a  service  devoted  to  her  highest  interests 
and  a  cordial  espousal  of  all  her  just  issues. 

His  career  in  the  United  States  Senate  has  been  long. 
Each  year  he  grew  in  effective  service.  The  desire  that 
his  country  should  always  pursue  the  course  that  seemed 
to  his  Christian  conscience  to  be  right,  combined  with  his 
ability,  industry,  tact,  and  experience,  gradually  brought 
him  to  a  high  position  in  her  councils  and  he  became  one 
of  her  statesmen,  perhaps  trusted  and  followed  beyond 
the  most  of  his  associates. 

His  life  has  been  pure  and  useful.  He  was  courteous 
and  helpful;  simple  in  living,  with  a  deep  faith  in  the  on- 
moving  purpose  of  God,  and  a  Christian  gentleman  whose 
memory  and  influence  this  State  and  nation  will  long 
cherish. 

His  funeral  is  to  be  held  at  Washington,  Conn.,  this 
afternoon  at  one-thirty  o'clock. 

As  a  token  of  respect  to  his  memory  I  recommend  that 


622  Orville  H.  Platt 

your  honorable  body  adjourn  for  the  day  and  take  any  other 
action  that  may  seem  to  you  fitting  and  proper. 

Ill 

MEMORIALS  IN  BRONZE 

The  State  of  Connecticut  by  acts  of  1905  and  1907 
appropriated  $25,000  to  erect  in  the  Capitol  grounds  at 
Hartford  a  memorial  to  Senator  Platt,  provision  being 
made  at  the  same  time  for  a  memorial  to  General  Hawley. 
For  the  Platt  memorial  a  commission  was  created  consist 
ing  of  H.  Wales  Lines  of  Meriden,  President,  Albiram 
Chamberlain  of  Meriden,  John  H.  Whittemore  of  Nauga- 
tuck,  Lewis  Sperry  of  South  Windsor,  Charles  L.  Hubbard 
of  Norwich,  and  William  J.  Ford  of  Washington,  together 
with  the  Commission  of  Sculpture,  which  at  that  time 
consisted  of  Kirk  H.  Leavens  of  Norwich,  Charles  Noll 
Flagg  and  Arthur  L.  Shipman  of  Hartford,  Henry  W. 
Farnam  and  Bernadotte  Perine  of  New  Haven,  and  Robert 
Scoville  of  Salisbury.  On  the  death  of  Dr.  Ford,  E.  K. 
Rossiter  of  Washington  was  appointed  to  the  vacancy. 
Burton  Mansfield  of  New  Haven  was  appointed  to  fill 
the  vacancy  caused  by  the  resignation  of  Mr.  Scoville  and 
H.  Siddons  Mowbray  of  Washington  to  fill  that  caused  by 
the  death  of  Mr.  Leavens.  The  commission  have  accepted 
the  design  of  H.  A.  MacNeil,  the  American  sculptor,— 
a  medallion  in  bronze  with  marble  border,  about  eight 
feet  in  diameter,  representing  the  Senator  in  high  relief 
seated  at  his  desk.  The  medallion  will  be  placed  on  the 
wall  at  the  right  of  the  principal  entrance  to  the  State 
Capitol. 

A  beautiful  and  appropriate  bronze  tablet,  the  work 
of  A.  Bertram  Pegram,  an  English  sculptor,  has  been 
placed  in  the  library  building  on  Washington  Green,  the 
gift  of  Mr.  E.  H.  Van  Ingen  of  New  York,  a  friend  and 
summer  neighbor  of  Senator  Platt. 


Appendix  623 

IV 

THE  PLATT  NATIONAL  PARK 

The  Platt  National  Park  is  in  the  southwest  corner  of 
the  "Chickasaw  Nation,"  Indian  Territory — now  merged 
in  the  new  State  of  Oklahoma.  It  comprises  848  acres  of 
land,  and  abounds  in  trees  of  nearly  every  description, 
hills,  dales,  ravines,  cliffs,  and  boulders  of  a  pre-historic  age. 
The  reservation  was  set  aside  by  treaty  with  the  Choctaw 
and  Chickasaw  tribes  of  Indians,  through  the  efforts  of 
Senator  Platt,  so  that  the  springs  and  creeks  might  be 
preserved  forever  for  the  benefit  of  the  whites  and  Indians. 

In  1906,  Congress  by  special  act  bestowed  upon  this 
reservation  the  name  of  Platt  National  Park  as  a  memorial 
to  the  Connecticut  Senator. 

V 

THE   JUDGMENT   OP  THE   PRESS 

Hartford  Courant 

Mr.  Platt's  career  in  the  Senate  has  been  one  of  steady 
growth  in  influence  and  usefulness.  It  will  probably  not 
do  to  describe  him  as  a  brilliant  man,  although  now  and 
then  a  most  delightful  humor  and  a  quick  Yankee  wit 
showed  themselves  in  his  utterances.  But  he  was  always 
safe  and  wise,  and  his  associates  came  to  trust  him  more 
and  more.  They  were  sure  of  his  motives  and  never 
had  to  look  for  the  selfish  or  ulterior  purpose.  His  clients 
were  the  State  of  Connecticut  and  the  United  States  of 
America.  His  judgments  vindicated  themselves  so  often  that 
their  soundness  ceased  to  be  questioned,  and  he  stepped  into 
his  position  of  leadership,  not  through  pushing  ambition,  but 
simply  by  the  right  of  recognition.  He  led,  because  others 
wanted  to  follow  such  a  man.  The  great  measures  with  which 
his  name  is  associated  show  the  influence  he  possessed. 

Personally,  Mr.  Platt  was  a  model  of  tact.  His  industry 
was  inexhaustible.  He  was  a  "working  member"  from 
the  start.  If  something  was  to  be  done,  Mr.  Platt  was  the 
man  to  do  it.  He  had  the  happy  gift  of  remembering 


624  Orville  H.  Platt 

faces  and  people,  and  so  escaped  from  many  of  the  troubles 
that  came  upon  his  colleague,  General  Hawley,  who  forgot 
letters,  faces,  and  people  themselves,  and  often  lost  friends 
thereby,  although  he  really  carried  in  his  heart  only  the 
kindest  sentiments  toward  all  mankind.  Hawley  had  to 
fight  for  most  of  his  re-elections,  while  to  all  appearances 
Platt 's  came  to  him  without  a  contest.  It  is  true  that  there 
were  occasions  when  the  riot  act  had  to  be  read  to  those 
who  wanted  to  shove  him  aside;  but  it  was  heard  and 
heeded.  He  was  so  strong  that  a  contest  was  manifestly 
useless.  Start  the  rumor  that  an  attempt  was  to  be  made 
against  him,  and  the  State  sizzled  with  indignation.  So 
it  came  about  that  he  was  elected  five  times,  an  honor 
Connecticut  has  never  conferred  on  any  other  of  her  sons. 

Mr.  Platt  was  equal  to  his  opportunity.  When  he  was  so 
unexpectedly  elected,  not  a  few  disappointed  observers 
set  him  down  for  a  clever  politician  and  an  ordinary 
lawyer,  and  doubted  if  he  was  able  to  fill  the  bill.  He  re 
mained  to  the  end  a  clever  politician,  and  was  so  recognized 
all  through  the  State;  but  he  developed  finely  into  con 
stitutional  lawyer,  expounder,  orator,  and  statesman,  a 
great  man  among  those  in  highest  places.  Doubt  among 
observers  gave  way  to  pride,  and  the  whole  State  was  his 
and  he  was  its. 

Platt  and  Hawley  made  a  splendid  working  team.  They 
were  different  in  many  respects  and  sometimes  differed  in 
opinion  and  consequently  in  vote,  but  they  were  always 
together  in  the  most  friendly  relations,  and  those  who 
heard  Mr.  Platt's  tribute  to  his  colleague  the  other  day 
at  the  State-house  will  always  remember  its  sweetness  and 
sincerity  and  the  grief  as  for  a  brother  that  so  shook  him 
as  he  spoke.  Few  of  us  thought  as  he  stood  there,  tall, 
straight,  and  apparently  as  well  as  he  had  been  for  years, 
that  so  soon  his  turn  would  come. 

For  many  years  Platt  and  Hawley  stood  together  there 
at  Washington,  two  big  men  for  one  little  State,  making 
their  State  big  by  the  strength  they  gave  to  its  voice  in 


Appendix  625 

affairs.  General  Hawley  began  to  die  several  years  ago, 
and  his  retirement  was  natural  and  inevitable ;  but  the  fall 
of  Senator  Platt  is  a  sudden  and  altogether  unexpected 
calamity,  and  its  extent  is  not  to  be  measured  offhand  at 
the  moment.  We  all  mourn  together.  The  State  has 
lost  her  foremost  citizen.  The  public  calamity  is  also  a 
widespread  private  grief.  We  doubt  if  any  other  man  in 
Connecticut  was  so  beloved.  Gentle,  approachable,  cordial, 
and  always  helpful,  he  was  the  friend  of  us  all.  It  is  a 
great  thing  for  the  State  to  have  had  his  splendid  services 
for  so  long — and  it  is  a  great  loss  to  be  deprived  of  them. 
But  he  has  done  the  work,  not  of  one  man  only,  but  of 
many,  in  his  long  and  useful  life,  and  he  is  entitled  to  his 
rest,  and  entitled  to  the  high  place  he  will  take  in  the  roll 
of  great  men  whom  this  State  has  given  to  the  nation. 

Waterbury  American 

Senator  Platt 's  life  has  furnished  a  remarkable  example 
of  gradual  and  constant  mental  development.  Every 
year  has  been  a  little  stronger,  a  little  wiser,  a  little  better, 
than  the  last.  His  latest  years  were  therefore  his  best, 
and  he  dies  at  the  very  height  of  his  mental  powers  and 
when  his  influence  was  greatest.  He  met  the  responsi 
bilities  of  to-day  so  well  that  new  and  heavier  ones  were 
put  upon  him  to-morrow,  and  they  have  increased  and 
grown  until  he  has  become  one  of  the  pillars  of  the  national 
temple.  He  made  Connecticut  the  foremost  State  in 
influence  in  the  United  States  Senate.  He  was  the  most 
progressive  mind  among  the  older  men  in  that  body,  doing 
his  best  to  free  it  from  the  chains  of  rule  and  habit  that  made 
action  difficult  and  gave  each  member  power  to  thwart 
all  the  rest. 

Waterbury  Republican 

He  had  genius — that  genius  which  the  philosopher  has 
defined  as  the  ability  to  work  hard;  an  ability  that  devel- 
40 


626  Orville  H.  Platt 

ops  character,  that  makes  brave  and  resourceful  men,  not 
afraid  to  grapple  with  the  most  perplexing  and  sometimes 
seemingly  insurmountable  problems  and  to  go  deep  into 
them,  that  begets  self-confidence  through  successful  ex 
perience,  and  earns  popular  confidence  by  solid  deeds 
accomplished.  We  do  not  need  to  apologize  for  the 
absence  of  brilliancy  in  such  a  man,  as  if  it  were  something 
lacking  in  him.  He  was  better  off  without  it,  for  he  trusted, 
not  in  the  inspirations  of  a  mind  that  flashes  good  or  bad 
ideas,  but  upon  careful  thought  and  a  rich  experience  earned 
with  toil.  An  Ingalls  arouses  our  admiration  and  plaudits 
for  a  time,  and  passes  away.  A  Platt  grows  wiser  and  more 
dependable  every  day  of  his  life  and  dies  in  the  harness. 

Meriden  Record 

The  life  work  of  Senator  Platt  is  like  a  mosaic.  Each 
tiny  piece  fits  perfectly  into  its  companion,  making  an 
artistic  and  practical  whole  which  challenges  admiration. 
There  have  always  been  a  sequence  and  a  proportion  about 
Senator  Platt 's  words  and  deeds  which  have  compelled  re 
spect.  Never  did  he  act  first  and  think  afterwards. ,  This 
logical  reasoning  and  dispassionate  thinking  led  him  to  oc 
cupy  the  highest  position  among  the  counsellors  of  the 
nation.  His  versatility  as  exploited  in  his  exquisitely  fash 
ioned  thoughts  and  delicately  moulded  language  was  off 
set  by  a  stability  of  reasoning  and  a  power  of  expression 
which  made  him  a  potent  statesman  as  well  as  orator. 

Aristocratic  in  all  the  good  that  the  word  implies,  he 
was  a  born  democrat,  and  this  one  characteristic  had  much 
to  do  in  the  career  of  this  distinguished  politician,  for 
politician  he  was,  of  the  purest,  highest  type.  He  was. a 
student  of  men  as  well  as  of  events. 

New  Haven  Leader 

He  did  not  dominate  by  force,  but  because  of  sturdy 
common-sense,  sterling  honesty,  unselfish  consecration  to 

duty. 


Appendix  627 

He  allured  by  genuine  goodness  of  heart  and  mind,  and 
he  subdued  by  the  sweetness  of  a  frank,  clear-headed 
prophetic  vision  which  rarely  was  at  fault  and  never 
eclipsed  by  selfish  purpose. 

New  Haven  Register 

He  began  early  to  see  that  great  as  it  was  to  be  a  dis 
tinguished  beneficiary  of  partisan  support,  it  was  greater 
to  be  an  American  citizen  in  office.  It  was  towards  this 
goal  that  he  worked  steadily  but  slowly,  for  his  was  not 
the  mind  to  take  short  cuts  to  a  destination,  and  he  began 
the  honorable  journey  with  the  determination  to  become  a 
master  of  the  intricacies  of  Senatorial  organization.  As  the 
years  multiplied  during  which  his  patience  never  wearied, 
his  good  sense  increased.  He  learned  the  folly  of  im 
petuous  action,  the  emptiness  of  opportune  appeals  to 
passion,  and  the  ever-present  value  of  sticking  to  funda 
mental  laws.  Simple  but  direct  in  speech,  his  occasional 
remarks  on  the  floor  of  the  Senate  commanded  attention, 
and  his  colleagues  awoke  more  and  more  to  the  fact  that, 
while  they  did  not  have  in  the  senior  Senator  from  Con 
necticut  a  man  of  brilliant  personal  magnetism  with  whom 
to  cross  swords,  in  the  clash  of  rhetorical  battle,  they  had 
a  plain,  straight-hitting,  and  effective  fighter  of  conviction 
and  courage.  What  little  he  had  to  say  rang  forth  with 
the  music  of  earnestness,  the  highest  form  of  true  eloquence. 

New  Haven  Journal  and  Courier 

During  the  last  few  years  he  has  been  the  chief  doer  of 
things  in  the  Senate,  relied  on  as  the  friend  and  counsellor 
of  the  President,  and  known  the  country  over  as  a  true 
patriot  and  a  safe  guide. 

New  London  Globe 

Orville  H.  Platt  was  a  thoroughly  good  man.  There 
was  not  a  page  of  his  life  that  could  not  be  read  by  every 


628  Orville  H.  Platt 

eye.     He  served  his  God,  his  country,  and  every  relation 
of  the  private  citizen  with  unfailing  regard  for  right. 

Brooklyn  Eagle 

Large,  necessarily  large  as  our  appropriations  have  been, 
they  would  have  been  millions  more  had  he  not  stood  like 
a  stone  wall  against  iniquitous  or  doubtful  propositions. 
Nor  was  his  work  one  of  prevention  alone.  He  was  a  con 
structive  statesman  of  the  first  rank.  He  framed  or  re 
drafted  not  a  few  of  the  measures  to  which  the  names  of 
other  men  were  attached  on  their  original  introduction 
of  them.  Every  important  act  of  Congress  in  his  time 
was  powerfully  affected  by  his  suggestion  or  opposition, 
when  his  party  had  the  control  of  affairs.  He  is  best 
known  as  the  author  of  the  Platt  Amendment  to  the 
measure  which  recognized  the  independence  of  the  Cuban 
republic.  It  was  an  amendment  which  forever  made 
paramount  the  rights  and  the  influence  of  the  United 
States  over  that  republic  and  which  that  republic  itself 
set  in  its  Constitution  as  a  permanency.  But  the  meas 
ures  are  thousands  for  number  which  he  has  quite  as  vitally 
directly  or  indirectly  affected.  William  McKinley  and 
Theodore  Roosevelt  never  had  a  better,  a  wiser,  or  a  more 
independent  friend.  The  latter  has  tenderly  and  elo 
quently  expressed  his  obligations  to  him.  .  .  . 

He  looked  like  Abraham  Lincoln,  and  was  unconscious 
of  it.  He  resembled  Abraham  Lincoln  in  virtues  and  in 
wisdom,  but  did  so  without  any  purposed  imitation. 
Executive  responsibility  did  not  come  to  him.  His  was 
all  legislative.  But  if  that  responsibility  had  come  to  him, 
we  think  he  would  have  shown  himself  to  be  a  great  ad 
ministrative  character  and  power.  We  are  aware  that 
many  of  our  readers  will  be  surprised  by  the  strong  esti 
mate  of  him  here  expressed.  But  that  estimate  is  deserved. 
Every  editor  knows  or  should  know  what  an  influential, 
patriotic,  conscientious,  mentally  strong  and  morally  fine 


Appendix  629 

public  servant  and  Senatorial  leader  Orville  H.  Platt  was. 
Republicanism  had  in  him  a  tower  of  strength.  Toward 
Democrats  and  toward  Democracy  he  was  in  nothing 
malevolent  and  in  all  matters  fair  and  tolerant.  His 
friendships  dissolved  party  lines.  His  confidence  in  a  man 
was  itself  a  tribute  to  that  man's  character  and  capacity. 
He  was  a  partisan,  but  he  always  sought  to  make  his  party 
better,  and  in  all  the  things  in  which  it  followed  him  it 
became  better,  because  it  followed  him.  We  can  not  but 
regard  his  death  as  a  national  loss,  and  we  can  only  hope 
that  the  reality  of  his  influence  will  long  be  felt  by  his 
party,  and  the  things  yet  unsecured  which  he  devised  for 
his  country  will  be  hereafter  secured  by  legislation  and  by 
administration  in  the  years  that  are  to  come. 

New  York  Evening  Post 

Solidity,  rather  than  brilliancy,  was  always  Mr.  Platt 's 
chief  characteristic.  In  the  Senate  he  proved  a  strong 
man,  becoming  one  of  the  half-dozen  controlling  spirits. 
In  fact,  he  had  for  years  been  a  sort  of  monitor  of  the 
Senate.  Following  everything  closely,  and  with  a  wide 
knowledge  of  national  affairs,  it  became  the  habit  of  the 
newer  and  less  attentive  Senators  to  be  governed  by  his 
course,  in  matters  of  routine,  voting  as  they  saw  him  vote, 
accepting  his  judgment  as  that  of  the  party,  and  in  the 
large  number  of  things  where  no  partisan  lines  are  drawn, 
as  that  of  the  Senate.  When  questionable  policies,  es 
pecially  along  new  and  sensational  lines,  have  been  pro 
posed,  the  common  query  has  been:  "What  will  Platt  of 
Connecticut  think  of  that?"  In  this  respect  he  fulfilled 
the  theory  of  a  Senator  which  the  founders  of  the  republic 
had  in  mind. 

New  York  Staats-Zeitung 

Senator  O.  H.  Platt  of  Connecticut,  over  whose  grave 
New  England  now  mourns,  was  a  whole  man.  He  was  a 


630  Orville  H.  Platt 

politician  from  head  to  toe,  but  in  every  inch  a  man  of 
honor.  He  was  a  worthy  companion  of  that  other  de 
parted  statesman  of  New  England  whom  Massachusetts 
had  honored  with  the  senatorial  toga.  Seldom,  however, 
in  our  time  are  men  like  Hoar  and  Platt  of  Connecticut 
produced.  They  sit  only  isolated  in  the  halls  of  legislation 
— those  men  whose  word  is  as  good  as  a  bond.  One  must 
look  around  until  they  are  found  for  men  to  whom  the  man 
date  given  to  them  by  the  people  is  worth  more  than 
self-interest.  Even  if  Platt  was  never  untrue  to  the  orders 
of  his  party,  which  he  himself  had  mistakenly  written, 
he  was  nevertheless  always  true  to  the  interests  of  the 
people  who  had  confided  to  him  his  high  office,  which  he 
filled  in  the  Senate  for  so  many  years  with  honor  and 
dignity. 

New  York  Tribune 

A  veteran  in  national  politics,  with  a  service  in  the 
Senate  extending  back  for  twenty-six  years,  Mr.  Platt  had 
risen  to  a  truly  commanding  position  in  public  life.  He 
was  one  of  the  real  leaders  in  the  deliberative  branch  of 
Congress,  sharing  with  perhaps  half  a  dozen  colleagues 
the  enormous  powers  which  usage  and  tradition  confer 
on  the  men  who  shape  and  execute  that  body's  legislative 
programme.  He  had  been  for  years  a  guiding  spirit  in 
those  intimate  inner  conferences  in  which  the  fate  of  meas 
ures  and  policies  is  decided,  and  his  influence  had  been 
felt  in  the  solution  of  every  problem  of  vital  consequence 
with  which  the  Senate  was  called  upon  to  deal.  His 
activities  were  both  constructive  and  critical;  for  while 
as  a  member,  and  subsequently  as  Chairman,  of  the  Ju 
diciary  Committee  his  advice  was  sought  on  the  form  and 
spirit  of  hundreds  of  measures,  he  interested  himself  be 
sides  in  initiating  and  championing  far-reaching  measures 
of  his  own,  his  Amendment  to  the  Army  Appropriation 
Bill  of  March  2,  1901,  defining  the  relations  of  Cuba  to  the 


Appendix  631 

United  States,  giving  him  an  indisputable  claim  to  high 
rank  among  the  constructive  statesmen  of  his  generation. 
Mr.  Platt's  power  as  a  leader  was  due  not  so  much  to 
brilliancy  as  to  steadiness.  He  was  industrious,  patient, 
and  clear-sighted,  and,  though  he  lacked  oratorical  gifts, 
he  had  the  faculty  of  sifting,  in  whatever  he  discussed,  the 
relevant  from  the  irrelevant,  the  material  from  the  im 
material.  His  mind  was  practical  and  his  temper  serene 
and  equable. 

Washington  Post 

It  is  to  be  regretted  that  this  simple,  plain,  great  char 
acter  was  so  little  known  to  the  people  of  the  country. 
His  whole  career  is  a  rebuke  to  the  thoughtless  and  mali 
cious  critics  who  describe  the  Senate  as  a  "millionaire's 
club,"  composed  of  men  working  solely  for  moneyed  in 
terests  and  in  heartless  disregard  of  the  rights  of  the  people. 

Senator  Platt  was  a  plain,  blunt  man.  His  great  gift 
was  that  of  common  sense.  His  leading  characteristic 
was  an  inborn  hatred  of  sham  and  pretence.  He  spoke 
rarely,  always  rising  with  an  odd  appearance  of  bashfulness. 
His  speech  was  marvellously  condensed  and  compact  with 
the  common  sense  that  amounts  to  wisdom.  His  gestures 
were  awkward  and  jerky.  His  manner  was  always  austere r 
and  sometimes,  to  those  who  did  not  know  him  well,  he 
appeared  to  be  impatient  and  petulant.  On  occasion  he 
employed  sarcasm  with  blighting  effect,  but  never  with 
bitterness.  His  industry  in  unearthing  frauds  and  his 
ability  in  stamping  them  as  such  in  a  single  sentence  were 
remarkable.  At  times  Senator  Platt  displayed  a  peculiar 
thorny  wit,  that  was  the  delight  of  his  older  colleagues, 
who  knew  the  lovable  nature  of  the  man  under  his  unbend 
ing  front. 

Absolutely  without  pretence,  Senator  Platt  performed 
the  tasks  that  fell  to  him  without  a  thought  of  public 
praise  or  blame.  He  made  himself  master  of  the  subject 


632  Orville  H.  Platt 

before  him,  and  then  gave  to  his  country  the  conclusions 
of  an  honest  and  singularly  clear  brain.  His  industry  was 
incessant  and  his  independence  unquestioned.  He  was 
a  conservative  by  heredity  and  training.  He  clung  to 
things  that  had  been  tried  and  proved.  No  one  in  the 
Senate  was  swayed  less  by  popular  clamor,  whether  this 
clamor  was  right  or  wrong.  His  duty  as  he  perceived  it 
was  to  study  and  deliberate,  for  the  purpose  of  reaching 
wise  conclusions.  He  performed  that  duty  without  the 
slightest  regard  to  public  criticism. 

Washington  Star 

During  his  whole  career  in  the  Senate  he  was  a  power 
for  good.  Men  of  both  parties  had  faith  in  him,  sought  his 
counsel,  and  in  many  things  followed  it.  In  this  way  he 
impressed  himself  on  legislation  with  which  his  name  was 
not  identified,  while  the  legislation  which  he  openly  fash 
ioned  was  of  the  best.  He  was  a  stout  partisan,  but  not 
a  narrow  one,  and  he  believed  in  the  United  States  and  its 
destiny  implicitly. 

The  Troy  Times 

The  chief  factor  in  making  Senator  Platt  one  of  the  six 
or  eight  who  formed  the  leading  group  in  the  United  States 
Senate  was  his  sagacity.  He  had  New  England  common- 
sense,  and  when  to  this  was  added  fidelity  to  political, 
moral,  and  personal  principle,  together  with  unflagging 
industry,  the  result  could  not  fail  to  be  potent  in  the  affairs 
of  the  Senate.  Senator  Platt  was  not  an  orator,  but  in 
these  days  of  business  administration  of  complex  interests 
he  was  more  than  an  orator — he  was  a  man  of  business 
genius.  To  reconcile  conflicting  ideas,  to  point  out  wise 
solutions,  and  to  formulate  plans  and  agreements  that  will 
endure  the  scrutiny  of  criticism  and  the  test  of  operation 
— this  is  the  most  useful  function  of  statesmanship,  and  in 
this  capacity  Senator  Platt  was  pre-eminent. 


Appendix  633 

Philadelphia  Press 

It  often  happens  through  adventitious  circumstances 
that  a  public  man's  reputation  is  bigger  than  he  is.  Senator 
Platt,  on  the  other  hand,  was  bigger  than  his  reputation. 
Modest,  unassuming,  unaffected,  he  did  not  seem,  save 
to  those  who  knew  the  inside,  to  be  playing  the  great  part 
he  was  actually  filling.  He  was  one  of  the  remarkable 
group  of  four  or  five  men  who  have  been  the  real  dominant 
leaders  of  the  Senate,  and  who  for  years  have  moulded  its 
policies  and  action.  The  Senate  is  a  body  where  seniority, 
masterfulness,  and  personality  together  make  up  the  in 
tangible  force  which  gives  a  man  ascendant  influence. 
Mr.  Platt's  unerring  sagacity  marked  him  for  leadership 
as  clearly  as  Mr.  Aldrich's  robust  strength  and  Mr.  Allison's 
unfailing  equipoise  and  Mr.  Spooner's  combined  penetration 
and  forensic  power  marked  them  for  the  foremost  rank. 

He  had  the  unlimited  confidence  of  his  associates.  They 
reposed  implicit  trust  in  his  sobriety  of  judgment  and  in  his 
purity  of  purpose.  He  was  endowed  with  saving  sense, 
and  going  back  over  his  long  record  it  can  be  said  that 
he  was  almost  invariably  right.  He  had  clear  insight  and 
a  quick  sympathy  with  the  true  currents  of  the  American 
people.  Though  missing  the  high  oratorical  gift,  he  had 
a  directness,  pungency,  and  virility  of  speech  that  made  him 
a  forcible  debater.  He  was  thoroughly  unselfish,  and  no 
man  was  ever  more  a  true  patriot  in  the  best  sense  of  the 
word.  It  could  be  said  of  him,  as  Wolsey  charged  Crom 
well,  that  all  the  ends  he  aimed  at  were  his  country's,  his 
God's,  and  truth.  He  had  the  high  moral  quality  of  Senator 
Hoar,  and  he  was  more  practical. 

Peoria  Evening  Star 

When  it  came  to  the  practical  application  of  the  prin 
ciples  of  government  that  needed  legislation,  Platt  had. 
no  superior  in  the  Senate.  In  committee  work,  in  the 


634  Orville  H.  Platt 

conferences  that  shaped  the  policy  of  the  nation,  Platt  was 
a  power.  He  never  strutted,  he  never  made  grand-stand 
plays,  he  never  appealed  to  the  prejudices  of  the  multitude ; 
he  was  straight  up  and  down,  never  frivolous,  never  tricky, 
never  artful,  never  unreliable.  He  had  the  old  New  Eng 
land  common-sense.  He  was  like  a  stalwart  oak.  There 
was  no  room  in  his  neighborhood  for  underbrush.  There 
was  a  Ben  Franklin  wisdom  in  everything  he  said  or  did, 
and  because  of  these  qualities  the  President  sought  his 
counsel.  His  brother  Senators  deferred  to  his  judgment, 
and  he  remained  up  to  the  last  moment  of  his  life  a  man  of 
great  power  in  the  State. 

Sioux  Falls  Press 

South  Dakota  has  reason  to  hold  in  affectionate  regard 
the  memory  of  Mr.  Platt.  Without  his  valuable  assistance, 
the  contest  for  statehood  in  1889  would  have  failed,  and  the 
omnibus  bill  through  which  four  new  stars  were  added  to  the 
national  galaxy  would  have  been  defeated.  Senator  Vest 
of  Missouri,  recently  deceased,  led  the  opposition,  and  had 
not  Senator  Platt  come  to  the  rescue  of  the  Territories 
asking  for  admission,  Mr.  Vest  would  have  succeeded. 
South  Dakota  is  entitled  to  a  place  among  those  of  this 
great  nation  who  mourn  the  departure  of  a  statesman 
and  a  friend. 

Kansas  City  Journal 

The  United  States  Senate  is  quick  to  distinguish  between 
a  mere  emotional  orator  and  a  man  of  solid  attainments, 
and  Senator  Platt  belonged  to  the  latter  class  by  virtue 
of  his  clear,  practical  common- sense,  fortified  by  years  of 
tireless  industry  in  the  study  of  public  matters  in  all  their 
details.  An  indefatigable  worker,  with  a  taste  for  legis 
lation,  his  long  years  of  public  service  made  him  a  master 
of  most  public  questions ;  in  fact  it  was  said  that  he  knew 


Appendix  635 

more  about  matters  coming  before  the  various  committees 
than  most  of  the  members  did  themselves. 

Topeka  Capital 

In  some  respects  he  was  the  strongest  man  in  the  United 
States  Senate.  With  Aldrich,  and  Allison  he  was  the  au 
thority  on  all  fiscal  subjects,  and  on  tariff  questions  was  the 
foremost  man  in  either  branch  of  Congress. 

Seattle  Post- Intelligencer 

Senator  Platt  has  never  stood  much  in  the  lime- light. 
He  was  never  one  of  the  great  orators  of  the  country  or  of 
the  Senate.  He  was  never  overly  conspicuous  in  debate. 
But  he  was  more.  His  long  years  in  the  public  service; 
his  ripened  wisdom;  his  magnificent  common-sense  and 
his  complete  familiarity  with  public  affairs  made  him  the 
final  counsellor,  the  adviser  of  last  resort  upon  whose  judg 
ment  his  colleagues  in  the  Senate,  and  the  Executive  as 
well,  had  learned  to  rely  with  absolute  confidence.  In  this 
sense  he  was  a  great  statesman. 

Atlanta  Constitution 

A  very  great  many  people  believe  that  Orville  H.  Platt 
was  the  ablest  of  all  Northern  Senators.  Other  men  have 
been  more  in  the  lime-light  of  publicity,  others  have 
figured  more  often  in  Senate  debate  and  in  political 
harangue,  others  have  been  and  are  much  better  known 
throughout  the  country;  but  it  is  doubtful  if  any  other  Sen 
ator  from  the  New  England  States  or  from  any  Northern 
State  has  ranked  as  high  as  Senator  Platt.  Certainly 
none  since  death  claimed  Senator  Hoar. 

The  product  of  New  England,  he  stood  as  the  represen 
tative  of  not  only  the  ideas  but  the  ideals  of  that  section 
of  the  country,  a  section  as  distinctive  as  is  the  West  or 


636  Orville  H.  Platt 

the  South.  In  him  was  reflected  the  rugged  conscience, 
the  strict  integrity,  the  blunt  directness  of  the  Puritan; 
but  with  all  this  there  was  that  consideration  for  others 
which  marks  the  gentleman  whencesoever  he  may  hail, 
a  broad  humanitarianism,  and  a  tenderness  that  may  have 
seemed  to  the  superficial  observer  out  of  place  in  that 
apparently  stern  environment.  To  those  who  had  not 
the  opportunity  of  insight  into  his  real  character,  Senator 
Platt  seemed  all  mind  and  without  heart.  As  a  matter  of 
fact,  however,  no  man  had  keener  sympathies  for  his 
fellow  men  and  their  best  interests. 


INDEX 


Abbott,  Lyman,  letter  on  Porto 
Rico,  354;  Platt's  reply  to 
same,  365 

Abolition  influence  in  Platt's 
boyhood,  5;  his  recollection 
of,  7-8 

Adams,  George  Everett,  inter 
national  copyright,  93;  dec 
orated  with  Legion  of 
Honor,  103 

Adams,  John  Quincy,  84 

Adirondacks,  Platt  goes  to,  563; 
fondness  for,  592 

Agard,  Bradley  R.,  42 

Agricultural  Department,  421 

Aguinaldo,  305-6 

Alaska,  letter  of  Platt  to  Dilling- 
ham  on,  309-10;  bill,  411 

Albany,  550 

Aldrich,  Nelson  Wilmarth,  cur 
rency  reform  conference, 
201;  conference  August, 
1903,  207;  member  Senate 
Finance  Committee,  223; 
in  Fifty-sixth  Congress,  312 ; 
visits  Cuba,  320;  submits 
open  session  amendment, 
401;  confers  with  Platt, 
564;  tribute  to  Platt,  599; 
eulogy  on  Platt,  602,  614-5 

Allen,  Charles  H.,  Governor  of 
Porto  Rico,  311 

Allen,  William  Vincent,  open 
session  resolution,  396 

Allison,  William  Boyd,  55,  201, 
207;  member  Senate  Fi 
nance  Committee,  223;  in 
Fifty-sixth  Congress,  312; 
closure  resolution,  409; 
conference  with  Platt,  564; 
tribute  to  Platt,  600,  603 


American  Authors'  Copyright 
League,  in 

American  party,  Platt's  con 
nection  with,  524 

American  Protective  T  a  r  i  ff 
League,  374 

American  Publishers'  Copyright 
League,  1 1 1 

Andrews,  Almon,  28 

Anthony,  Henry  B.,  55 

Ant  i-expansionists  of  New 
Haven,  288 

Anti-Injunction  bill,  425 

Anti-Option  bill,  433 

Anti-pooling  movement,  455 

A.  P.  A.,  McKinley's  attitude  to, 

503-4 

Appleton,  William  H.,  84-5 
Appleton,  W.  W.,  91,  no 
Archaeology,  Platt's  interest  in, 

593 

Arnell,  Samuel  M.,  85 
Arthur,    Chester    Alan,    Platt's 

relations  with,  496-7 
Aspinwall  place,  22 
Atkins,  E.  F.,  letter  to,  349 
Atlanta     Constitution,    obituary 

editorial,  635 


B 


Bacon,  Augustus  Octavius,  320- 
2,  326;  Platt's  reply  to, 
328-31 

Baldwin,  J.  G.,  85 

Baldwin,  Marcus  E.,  44-6 

Baldwin,  Simeon  E.,  tribute  to 
Platt,  601-2 

Banning,  Henry  B.,  87 

Barker,  Wharton,  letter  from 
Platt  on  Canadian  recipro 
city,  393 

Barkhamsted,  553 


637 


638 


Index 


Barnum,  P.  T.,  53 

Barnum,  William  H.,  37 

Bayard,  Thomas  F.,  55 

Beck,  James  B.,  international 
copyright;  92;  coinage,  178 

Beck  amendment,  178 

Berne  Convention,  effect  of,  89, 
90 

Beveridge,  Albert  J.,  Alaskan 
question,  310;  in  Fifty-sixth 
Congress,  312;  congratula 
tory  message  from,  559;  at 
funeral  of  Platt,  586;  eu 
logy  on  Platt,  603,  613-4 

Birge,  John,  letter  from  Platt  to, 
266 

Bissell,  Major,  29 

Elaine,  James  Gillespie,  on  re 
ciprocity,  235;  pronuncia- 
mento,  236;  compaign  of 
1884,  497 

Blake,  Henry  T.,  letter  from 
Platt  to,  538 

Bland,  Richard  Parks,  180 

Bland-Allison  act,   175 

Bliss,  Tasker  H.,  work  in  Cuba, 

379 

Booth,  Newton,  55 
Bowen,  Henry  C.,  Platt's  reply 

to  editorial  by,  182 
"Boxers"  in  Congress,  374 
Brandegee,     Frank     Bosworth, 

eulogy  on  Platt,  603,  611-2 
Breckinridge,  W.  C;  P.,  advocate 

of  international  copyright, 92 
Bridgeport,    Platt's     closure 

speech   at,    405 
Bromley,  Isaac  H.,  letters  from 

Platt  to,  on  Cuba,  265;  on 

Fessenden  episode,  551 
Brooke,  Major-General  John  R., 

315 

Brooker,  Charles  F.,  letter  from 
Platt  to,  519 

Brooklyn  Eagle,  tribute  to  Platt, 
628 

Brooklyn  Union  League  Club, 
Platt  addresses,  on  expan 
sion,  300 

Bruce,  Blanche  K.,  55 

Bryan,  letter  of  Platt  concern 
ing,  424 

Bryant,  William  Cullen,  84,  85 

Buchanan,  James,  84 

Buck,  John  R.,  letters  from 
Platt  to,  on  Venezuelan 


affair,  471-2;  on  McKinley 
cabinet,  505;  on  re-election 
of  Platt, _  538;  on  St.  Louis 
Convention,  544,  546 

Buell,  Theodore,  29 

Bulkeley,  Governor  Morgan  G., 
letter  from  Platt  to,  declin 
ing  judicial  position,  537; 
at  funeral  of  Platt,  586; 
eulogy  on  Platt,  603,  609-10 

Bull,  Miss  Annie,  marriage  to 
O.  H.  Platt,  20;  death  of, 

25 

Burnside,  Ambrose  E.,  55 

Burrows,   Julius   C.,   on   Senate 

Finance     Committee,     253; 

in  Fifty-sixth  Congress,  312 

Butler,  Charles  Henry,  arranges 

dinner  to  Platt,  582-3 
Butler,  Matthew  Calbraith,  140 
Butterworth,    Benjamin,    advo 
cate  of   international  copy 
right,  92 

Byington,  A.  H.,  letters  from 
Platt  to,  33,  424 


Canadian  reciprocity,  letter  from 
Platt  on,  393-4 

Candee,  Charles  T.,  30 

Candee,  J.  B.,  29 

Canfield,  Lewis  A.,  5,  23 

Cannon,  Joseph  G.,  409 

Capital,  relations  with  labor, 
419-40;  control  of,  441 

Carey,  Rev.  William  B.,  letter 
from  Platt  to,  270 

Carlisle,  Platt's  estimate  of,  119 

Carpenter,  Matt.  H.,  55 

Carter,  Thomas  H.,  in  Fifty- 
sixth  Congress,  312;  at 
funeral  of  Platt,  586 

Cercle  de  la  Librairie,  103-4 

Chace  bill,  91-4 

Chaffee,  S.  E.,  letter  from  Platt 
to,  on  Hague  treaty,  479 

Chandler,  William  E.,  amend 
ment  to  war  resolutions, 
280;  in  Fifty-sixth  Con 
gress,  312;  recollections  of 
Cuban  Committee  confer 
ence,  338-9;  work  on  Platt 
Amendment,  355;  letter  of 
Platt  to,  regarding  contri 
bution  of  corporations  to 


Index 


639 


Chandler — Continued 

campaign   fund,    449;  trib 
ute  to  Platt,  599 

Chandler,  Zachariah,  55 

Chapin,  Charles  F.,  letter  from 
Platt  to,  525 

Cherokee  Outlet,  117 

Chickasaw  Indians,  123 

Chinese  Exclusion,  150-63; 
Platt's  speech  against,  496 

Chinese     legislation     proposed, 

567 

Chippewa  Indians,  118 

Choate,  Rufus,  84 

Choctaw  Indians,  123 

Clarendon  Treaty,  86 

Clark,  Champ,  eulogy  on  Platt, 
602 

Clark,  Charles  Hopkins,  letters 
of  Platt  to,  concerning  duty 
on  books,  256;  Cuba,  266; 
Wellman  article,  351-2;  in 
terstate  commerce  legisla 
tion,  462-4;  Platt  as  can 
didate  for  vice-president, 
548 

Clark,  Clarence  D.,  in  Fifty- 
sixth  Congress,  312 

Clark,  Rush,  Platt's  eulogy  on, 
58-60 

Clark,  Walter  Eli,  576 

Clay,  Henry,  International 
Copyright  bill,  83-4 

Clayton-Bulwer  treaty,  474 

Cleveland,  Grover,  international 
copyright  indorsed  by,  88-9; 
second  election  of,  181; 
special  session  on  Sherman 
law,  1 86;  message  on  tar 
iff  revision,  213;  attitude 
toward  Cuba,  265;  Wilson- 
Gorman  bill,  241;  nomi 
nations  confirmed  in  s e- 
cret  session,  396;  attitude 
toward  labor,  423;  Venez 
uelan  message,  470;  pen 
sion  vetoes,  497 ;  Homestead 
riots,  498;  Platt's  attitude 
toward,  499,  500 

Closure,  Platt's  amendment,  408 

Cockrell,    Francis    M.,  55,    312, 

5i8 
Coe,  John,  letters  from  Platt  to, 

46,  57,  551 
Coe,  Levi  E.,  40 
Coe,  Lyman  W.,  42 


Cogswell,  Mrs.,  23 

Collins,  Patrick,  reports  Copy 
right  bill,  91 

Colombia,  treaty  with,  409;  let 
ter  from  Platt  on,  478;  re 
lations  with  Panama,  484; 
treaty  with,  563 

Congregational  Church,  Platt  a 
member  of,  591 

Conkling,  Roscoe,  55 

Connecticut,  gives  State  recep 
tion  to  Platt,  538;  armorial 
bearings  of,  559;  Platt's  in 
terest  in  early  history  of, 
593;  memorial  resolutions 
by  General  Assembly,  619- 
620 

Cook,  Charles  C.,  Chairman 
Committee  State  Reception, 
558;  letter  from  Platt  to, 
56i 

Cooke,  Governor  Lorrin  A.,  let 
ter  from  Platt  to,  272 

Corbett  appointment,  416 

Corporations,    regulation    of, 

438 

Courant,  Hartford  (see  Hart 
ford  Courant,  also  Clark, 
Charles  Hopkins) 

Cox   S.  S.,  86 

Coxey's  army,  247 

Crampton,  Samuel  M.,  letter 
from  Platt  to,  regarding 
patronage,  529 

Crane,  Winthrop  M.,  at  funeral 
of  Platt,  586 

Cuba,  reciprocity  with,  235, 
369-383;  war  in,  260- 
283;  annexation  of,  article 
by  Platt  in  World's  Work, 
345-7;  Cuban  Convention, 
344;  Reciprocity  bill  passes 
House,  382;  Platt's  appeal 
for,  382;  reciprocity  treaty, 

563 

Cuban  Committee,  311-323; 
their  work  on  Platt  Amend 
ment,  336-368 

Cuban  scandals,  324  ff. 

Cullom,  Shelby  M.,  tribute  to 
Platt,  63;  in  Fifty-sixth 
Congress,  312;  work  on  Platt 
Amendment,  355;  eulogy  on 
Platt,  600 

Currency  reform,  199  ff. 

Curtis,  George  William,  102 


640 


Index 


Daignan,  Charles,  22 

Dakota,  admission  of ,  140-1 

Danbury,  544 

Daniel,  John  Warwick,  inter 
national  copyright  opposed 
by,  92;  at  funeral  of  Platt, 
586 

Davis,  C.  R.,  in  Fifty-sixth 
Congress,  312 

Davis,  David,  571 

Dawes,  Henry  L.,  55;  chairman 
Committee  on  Indian  Af 
fairs,  114-6 

Debs,  Eugene,  499 

De  Lome  letter,  269 

Dewey  at  Manila,  284 

Diary  of  one  day  in  Senator 
Platt's  life,  574-6 

Dick,  Charles  L.,  asks  support 
of  Platt  for  Hanna,  566;  at 
funeral  of  Platt,  586 

Dillingham,  letter  of  Platt  to,3io 

Dingley,  Nelson  A.,  offered 
Treasury  portfolio,  504 

Dingley  bill,  results  of,  213; 
framed,  253;  revision  of, 
384-94 

Dingley  tariff,  252  ff. ;  comment 
on,  590 

District  of  Columbia,  govern 
ment  of,  298 

Dodd,  Frank  H.,  in 

Dodd,  Samuel,  40 

Dorsheimer,  William,  Represent 
ative,  88 

Downs,  William  E.,  29 

Dubois,  Fred  T.,  540-1 

Dunham,  S.  C.,  letter  from  Platt 
to,  462 

Dwight,  Timothy,  letter  to  Platt 
on  currency  question,  202; 
Platt's  reply  to  same,  202-4 


E 


Eaton,  William  W.,  32,  37,  57 
Edmunds  George  F.,  letter  from 
Platt  to,  on  Cuba,  267;  ad 
vocate  of  arbitration  treaty, 

Eggleston,  work  on  international 

copyright,  90 
Eight- Hour  bill,  Platt   opposes, 

425 


Elkins  act,  460 

Ellsworth,  Oliver,  413,  603 

English,  W.  E.,  88 

Episcopal  Church,  attended  by 

Platt,  591 
Estes,   Dana,  letter  from  Platt 

to,  105 

Evarts,  William  M.,  14,  87 
Evening    Post,   New    York    (see 

New  York  Evening  Post) 
Everett,  Edward,  84,  85 
Ewing,  Thomas,  84 
Expansion,  284  ff. 


Fairbanks,  Charles  Warren,  in 
Fifty-sixth  Congress,  312; 
tribute  to  Platt,  601 

Farmers  of  Connecticut  send  tel 
egram  on  Anti-Option  bill, 

435 

Farrell,  Franklin,  letter  to,  from 
Platt,  regarding  Cuba,  264 

Federation  of  Labor,  425,  427 

Ferry,  Thomas  W.,  55 

Fessenden,  Samuel,  letter  from 
Platt  to,  196;  Platt  writes 
to,  regarding  senatorship, 
539;  manager  of  Reed  can 
vass, 543;  control  of  Connec 
ticut  vote  reported,  546; 
relations  with  T._  C.  Platt 
and  Quay,  547;  with  Reed, 
548;  with  Orville  H.  Platt, 
548,  550 

Fifty-first  Congress,  work  of, 
227-240 

Fifty-sixth  Congress,  leaders  of, 
312 

Finance  Committee,  64,  223 

Finance,  sound, 165-174 

Fisher,  George  P.,  writes  to 
Platt  opposing  retention  of 
Philippines,  289;  Platt's  re 
ply  to,  289-90 

Flagg,  John  H.,  Platt's  letters  to, 
regarding  finance,  185,  207, 
209;  on  Cuba,  273,  276-8; 
on  Garden  of  Eden,  335; 
on  Wellman  article,  352-3; 
on  Finance  Committee, 
540;  on  Fessenden  episode, 
545-6;  on  Meriden  address, 
570 


Index 


641 


Foraker,  Joseph  Benson,  in 
Committee  on  Foreign  Re 
lations,  278;  amendment  to 
resolution,  280;  in  Fifty- 
sixth  Congress,  312;  Chair 
man  Committee  on  Porto 
Rico  and  the  Pacific  Islands, 
359;  letter  from  Platt  to, 
on  Porto  Rican  Tariff,  359 

Foraker  amendment,  331;  dis 
cussed  by  Platt  with  For 
aker,  333-4;  results  of,  333, 
370 

"Force  Bill,"  400 

Ford,  Dr.  William  F.,  564;  letter 
from  Platt  to,  568,  581;  at 
tends  Platt  in  last  illness, 585 

Free  silver,  175 

Fremont,  support  of,  31 

French  Canadians,  Platt  com 
mends,  148 

French  treaty,  Kasson's,  257-9 

Frye,  William  P.,  amendment 
to  International  Copyright 
bill,  100;  in  Fifty-sixth  Con 
gress,  312;  president  pro 
tern  of  Senate,  540,  573 


G 


Gallinger,  Jacob  H.,  in  Fifty- 
sixth  Congress,  312;  at  fun 
eral  of  Platt,  586 

Garfield,  James  A.,  Platt's  rela 
tions  with,  495 

Garland,  A.  H.,  55 

Gear,  John  H.,  Platt's  eulogy  on, 
62;  in  Fifty-sixth  Congress, 
312 

Geary  bill,  160 

George,  James  Z.,  international 
copyright  opposed  by,  92; 
Platt's  eulogy  on,  413 

Gibbons,  James,  Cardinal,  letter 
on  A.  P.  A.,  503 

Gila  River  episode,  126 

Gorman,  Arthur  Pue,  obstructs 
Election  bill,  400;  Panama 
question,  488;  comment  on, 
5i8 

Graham,  William  F.,  40 

Gray,  George,  Platt  writes  to,  re 
garding  Cuba,  316;  letters 
from  Platt  to,  480,  517 

Great  Britain,  arbitration  treaty 
with,  473 


Greeley,  General  E.  S.,  letter 
from  Platt  to,  262 

Green,  George  W.,  Secretary 
Authors'  League,  90 

Greenback  propaganda,  176 

Greene,  Jacob  L.,  410 

Grosvenor,  Charles  H.,  eulogy 
of  Platt,  602 

Gunn,  Frederick  W.,  early  life, 
13;  Platt's  character  sketch 
of,  1 6,  23;  school  broken 
up,  19;  dispatch  from,  to 
Platt,  50;  Platt  writes  of, 

59i 

Gunn,  John,  leading  Abolition 
ist,  5,  6,  14 


H 


Hadley,  Arthur  T.,  tribute  to 
Platt,  456 

Hague  treaties,  479 

Hale,  Edward  Everett,  tribute 
to  Platt,  600 

Hale,  Eugene,  in  Fifty-sixth 
Congress,  312 

Hamlin,  Hannibal,  55 

Hamoton,  Wade,  55 

Hanna,  Hugh  H.,  organizes 
Indianapolis  Convention, 
199 

Hanna,  Marcus  Alonzo,  makes 
tariff  1896  issue,  196;  gold 
plank  in  platform,  198;  in 
Fifty-sixth  Congress,  312; 
correspondence  with  Platt 
regarding  Cabinet,  507; 
friendship  with  Platt,  508- 
9;  possible  nomination  for 
President,  513;  letter  from 
Platt  to,  urging  special  ses 
sion,  564;  reply  to,  565; 
death  of,  569;  eulogy  of, 
576 

Hansbrough,  H.  C.,  540-1 

Harris,  Isham  G.,  refuses  to  sign 
Silver  act,  180 

Harrison,  Benjamin,  message  on 
international  copyright,  92; 
Indian  policy,  125;  Chair 
man  Committee  on  Terri 
tories^  145;  relations  with 
Platt  in  Senate,  500;  letter 
from,  to  Platt,  501 


642 


Index 


Harrison,  Lynde,  letters  of  Platt 
to,  on  reciprocity,  236;  on 
arbitration  with  Colombia, 
478;  Platt  suggests  his 
name  for  diplomatic  service, 

534 

Hartford,  Platt  speaks  at  Work- 
ingmen's  Club,  431;  Con 
vention  of  1903,  554-5;  re 
ception  to  Platt  at,  559; 
memorial  service  for  Haw- 
ley,  584 

Hartford  Courant,  547,  559,  623 
(also  see  Clark,  Charles 
Hopkins) 

Hartford  Post    editorial,    547-9 

Hartley,  M.,  letter  of  Platt  to, 
428 

Havana  Convention,  337 

Hawaii,  speech  of  Platt  on  an 
nexation  of,  285;  govern 
ment,  307;  letters  from 
Platt  regarding,  308,  470; 
Cleveland's  policy  toward, 
499;  reminiscence  of  con 
ference  on, 617-8 

Hawley,  General  Joseph  R.,  can 
didate  for  Senate,  38,  42-5, 
47-8;  compared  with  Platt, 
65;  in  Fifty-sixth  Congress, 
312;  possible  nominee  for 
President,  497;  mentioned 
for  Secretary  of  War,  505-8; 
in  Connecticut  politics,  535; 
on  retired  list,  576;  death 
of,  582;  Platt's  eulogy  of, 
584;  tribute  to,  624 

Hay,  John,  Secretary  of  State, 
311;  on  arbitration,  477; 
letter  from  Platt  to,  on 
Hague  treaties,  479;  Platt's 
support  of,  573 

Hayes,  Gordon,  Anti-Abolition 
action,  5,  18 

Hayes,  Rutherford  B.,  calls 
special  session,  54;  Chinese 
policy,  153;  his  Cabinet, 

494 

Henry,  E.  Stevens,  eulogy  of 
Platt,  602 

Hepburn  Pure  Food  bill,  576-7 

Hey  wood,  Abbott,  leader  of  Lib 
erals  in  Utah,  135 

Higgins,  Edwin  W.,  eulogy  of 
Platt,  600 

Hill,  B.  H.,  55 


Hill,  David  B.,  course  regarding 
Sherman  act,  185,  249 

Hill,  Ebenezer,  eulogy  of  Platt, 
602,  617 

Hiscock,  Frank,  223 

Hoar,  George  Frisbie,  inter 
national  copyright,  92;  re 
ports  Election  bill,  228; 
anti-imperialism,  294;  ques 
tions  Platt  in  Senate,  297- 
8;  Philippine  tariff,  303-7; 
in  Fifty-sixth  Congress,  31 2; 
amendment  to  Senate  rules, 
400;  presses  Election  bill, 
401;  suggested  for  Presi 
dent  pro  tern  of  Senate,  540; 
Chairman  Judiciary  Com 
mittee,  571;  tributes  to, 
596;  compared  with  Platt, 

633 
Hollister,  Gideon  H.,  Platt  reads 

law  with,  20,  22 
Hollister,  John  C.,  30 
Hollister,  Mrs.  Preston,  23 
Hotchkiss,  Phil.  Pratt,  letter  of 

Platt  to,  514 
Hough,  Dr.,  28 
Howard,  Bronson,  106 
Howard,  Philip  E.,  letter  to,  30 
Hoyt,  George  A.,  26 
Hurley,  James,  324,  586 
Hymn,  Platt's  favorite,  592 


Idaho,  admission  of,  143 
Income  tax,  Platt  speaks  on,  449 
Indian,  Platt's  work  for  the,  114- 

133 

Indian  Committee,  593 

Indian  Rights  Association,  125 

Indianapolis  Convention,  199 

Ingalls,  John  J.,  Platt's  eulogy 
on,  576 

Interior  Department  overbur 
dened,  79-80 

International  Copyright,  83  ff.; 
work  for,  83-113;  its  advo 
cates  and  opponents,  92 

Interstate  Commerce,  455  ff. 

Iron  ore,  protection  of,  249- 
50 

Isthmian    Canal    (see  Panama) 

Iverson,  Henry,  86 


Index 


643 


Jay,  John,  85 

Jewell,  Marshall,  political  career, 
39;  candidate  ^  for  Senate, 
40;  in  Garfield^election,  495 

Johnson,  Robert  Underwood, 
Secretary  Authors'  League, 
90;  response  to  toast,  102; 
letter  to,  104;  letter  from, 
no 

Joint  Campaign  Committee  on 
international  copyright,  90 

Jones,  James  K.,  116 

Jones,  John  P.,  55;  member  Sen 
ate  Finance  Committee, 
223,253 

Judea,  Conn.,  history  of,  4  ff. 

Judiciary  Committee  of  Senate, 
64;  chairmanship  of,  572 

Judson,  Antoinette,  23 


K 


Kansas  City  Journal,  634 
Kasson  treaty  with  France,  257 
Kean,  John,  at  funeral  of  Platt, 

586;  eulogy   on    Platt,    603 
Kellam,  A.   H.,  letters  of  Platt 

to,  regarding  Tariff  bill, 232; 

on  Elaine  pronunciamento, 

236 

Kellogg,  William  Pitt,  55 
Kelly,  Abby,  5,  6 
Kenealy,  Michael,  letter  of  Platt 

to,  526 
Kennedy,    John    L.,    represents 

Typographical  Union,  92 
de     Ke~ratry,     Count     E.,     102; 

bearer  of  gold  medal  from 

French  societies,  103 
Kickapoo    Indian,    letter   from, 

130-1 
Kingsbury,  F.    J.,    letter    from 

Platt  to,  129 
Kirby,    Conn.,   26,   584 
Kirkwood,  Samuel  J.,  55 
Knights  Templars,  34 
Know-Nothing  party,  147 


Lamar,  L.  Q.  C.,  55 

Lathrop,  George    P.,  Secretary 

Authors'  League,  90 
Lavigne,  Germond,   104 


Lawler,  Miss,  574 

Leader,  New  Haven  (see  New 
Haven  Leader) 

Legion  of  Honor,  decoration 
offered  Platt,  103 

Lewes,  I.C.,  contributes  to  Platt 
canvass,  553 

Liliuokalani,  restoration  of,  499 

Lilley,  George  L.,  eulogy  of 
Platt,  603 

Lincoln,  Abraham,  Platt  com 
pared  to,  588,  628 

Lines,  H.  Wales,  Chairman 
Campaign  Committee,  40; 
letters  of  Platt  to,  41;  con 
cerning  Cuba,  263;  possible 
war,  271;  other  letters,  543; 
finances  campaign  of  1879, 
552;  State  reception,  558 

Litchfield,  historic  importance 
of,  3 

Littlefield,  Charles  E.,  447 

Lodge,  Henry  Cabot,  interna 
tional  copyright,  102; 
amendment  to  Wilson- 
Gorman  Tariff  bill,  .186;  dis 
cussion  1896  platform,  197: 
Election  bill,  228 ;  Chairman 
Committee  on  Philippines, 
311;  in  Fifty-sixth  Con- 

fress,  312;  eulogy  of  Platt, 
02-3 

Logan,  John  A.,  55 
Loomis,  Francis  B.,  575 


M 


McClellan,  Platt's  comment  on, 

I  517 

McDonald,  J.  E.,  55 

McDonald,  J.  H.,  letter  from 
Platt  to,  525 

McKinley,  William,  advocate 
of  international  copyright, 
92;  Platt  writes  to,  122; 
views  on  currency  question, 
196;  results  of  election  of, 
199;  apostle  of  protection, 
222;  Tariff  bill,  228;  Demo 
cratic  abuse  of  same,  238; 
nominated  for  President, 
253;  special  message  on  re- 
concentration,  268;  mes 
sage  on  Cuba,  278;  Platt's 
letter  to,  favoring  cession  of 
Philippines,  287-8;  framing 


644 


Index 


33; 

RK 


McKinley — Continued 

of  Cuban  Constitution, 
abolition  of  Porto 
can  tariff,  358;  Platt  con 
fers  with,  on  same,  361; 
Tariff  bill  obstructed  by 
Gorman,  400;  attitude  on 
silver,  502;  framing  Cab 
inet,  504;  assassination  of, 
Platt's  comment  on,  510; 
movement  to  offer  Platt 
vice-presidency  on  ticket, 
548 

McLean,  Governor    George   P., 

McMillan,  James,  312 
MacNeil,  H.  A.,  designer  of  Platt 

medallion,  622 
Maine,  the,  269 
Manderson,  Charles  F.,  540 
Meriden,     Conn.,      address     to 

church  at,  570;  attendance 

from,   at  funeral   of   Platt, 

586;  Platt    a    member    of 

church  in,  591 
Meriden  Record,  626 
Merritt,  C.  H.,  letter  from  Platt 

to,  544 
Metcalf,  V.  H.,  letter  of  Platt  to, 

426 

Mills,  Roger  Q.,  222 
Miner,  William  C.,  letter  of  Platt 

to,  230 

Mitchell,  Elnathan,  n 
Monetary  Commission,  199-200 
Money,   Hernando  de   Soto,   in 

Fifty-sixth    Congress,    312; 

aid    in    Platt  Amendment, 

341 

Morgan,  John  T.,  55;  served 
with  Platt  on  Indian  Com 
mittee,  132-3;  Platt's  reply 
to,  in  Fifty-sixth  Congress, 
312;  compels  special  ses 
sion,  409;  eulogy  of  Platt, 
602,  615 

Mormons,  135 

Morrill,  Justin  S.,  55;  reports 
McKinley  Tariff  bill,  228 

Morrill  bill,  178 

Morrison,  W.  R.,  "Horizontal" 
bill,  213 

Morrow,  James  B.,  recalls  last 
interview  with  Platt,  578 

Mowbray,  H.  Siddons,  622 

Murphy,  Governor,  574 


N 


National  Museum,  Platt  secures 
appropriation  for,  594 

National  Park,  623 

Neeley  defalcation,  320,  328 

Nelson,  Knute,  in  Fifty-sixth 
Congress,  312;  eulogy  on 
Platt,  603,  615 

Nettleton,  Daniel,  n 

New  England,  Platt  defends 
manufacturers  of,  215-7 

New  Haven  Journal  and  Cour 
ier,  627 

New  Haven  Leader,  549,  560, 
626 

New  Haven  Register,  627 

New  London  Globe,  627 

New  York  Evening  Post,  629 

New  York  Staats-Zeitung,  629 

New  York  Tribune  (see  Brom 
ley,  Isaac  H.) 

North,  S.  N.  D.,  first  meeting 
with  Platt  for  discussion  of 
woollen  schedule,  242 


O 


Obstruction,  factor  of  Senate  de 
bates,  409 

Oklahoma,  admission  of,  144; 
Platt  National  Park  in,  623 

Olney,  Richard,  opposes  action 
on  Cuban  question,  265; 
despatch  to  Salisbury,  472; 
comment  on,  518 

Osborn,  A.  D.,  letter  from  Platt 
to,  concerning  Cuba,  263; 
on  Panama,  484-5 

Outlook,  the,  article  on  "Stand 
ing  Rock  Reservation,"  126; 
letter  from  Platt  to,  on 
Venezuelan  situation,  474 


Paige,  A.  W.,  558 
Panama,  revolution  in,  564 
Panama    Canal,    Platt    favors, 

483  ff. 
Parker,  Alton  B.,  compared  by 

Platt  to  McClellan,  517 
Parker,  Charles,  553 
Parker,  Rev.  E.  P.,  letter    from 

Platt  to,  on  Cuba,  263 


Index 


645 


Pasco,  Samuel,  opposes  Inter 
national  Copyright  bill,  102 

Patronage,  Platt's  ideas  on,  528 

Patterson  bill,  162 

Payne,  Henry  C.,  friendship 
with  Platt,  568 

Payne,  Sereno  E.,  Porto  Rican 
Tariff  bill,  358;  eulogy  of 
Platt,  602 

Peffer,  William  A.,  moves  to  put 
iron  on  free  list,  249 

Pegram,  A.  Bertram,  sculptor  of 
memorial  to  Platt,  622 

Pendleton,  George  H.,  55 

Pension  Order  78,  567 

Peoria  Evening  Star,  633-4 

Perkins,  George  Clement,  eulogy 
of  Platt,  603,  616 

Pettus,  Edmund  W.,  in  Fifty- 
sixth  Congress,  312;  at 
funeral  of  Platt,  586 

Philadelphia  Press,  633 

Philippines,  284  ff.;  opening  of 
religious  opportunity  in, 
284;  letter  to  George  P. 
Fisher,  arguing  retention  of, 
289-94 

Pickett,  Charles  W.,  letter  of 
Platt  to,  regarding  senator- 
ship,  549 

Pierrepont,  Edwards,  14 

Pima  Indians,  127 

Platt,  Almyra  Hitchcock, mother 
of  Senator  Platt,  9,  10 

Platt,  Daniel,  father  of  Orville 
H.,  1,9 

Platt  family,  genealogy  of,  2,  3 

Platt,  James,  letter  from  O.  H. 
Platt  to,  regarding  Hart 
ford  Post  editorial,  547; 
Fessenden  episode,  549; 
appointed  to  Federal  bench, 

595 

Platt,  John,  grandfather  of  O.  H. 
Platt,  2 

Platt,  Mrs.  Jeannie,  marriage, 
26;  letters  to,  324-5,  564; 
declines  State  funeral  after 
Senator  Platt's  death,  585 

Platt,  Orville  H.,  birth  and  an 
cestry,  1-2;  early  home, 
3-4;  Abolition  influences  in 
boyhood,  5  ff.;  mother  of, 
9-10;  recollections  of  boy 
hood,  11-12,  21-24;  in 
fluence  of  Frederick  W. 


Gunn  upon,  13-20;  marries 
Miss  Annie  Bull,  20; 
teaches  at  Litchfield,  20; 
residence  in  Towanda,  21; 
return  to  Meriden,  21; 
love  of  nature,  23  ff.;  death 
of  Mrs.  Platt,  25;  marries 
Miss  Jeannie  P.  Smith,  26; 
home  at  Kirby  Corner,  26; 
residence  in  Meriden,  27  ff.; 
Judge  of  Probate,  29;  State 
Senator,  32;  religious  life, 


33;  letter  to  A.  H.  Bying- 
ton,  33;  membership  Meri 
den  Lodge  and  St.  Elmo 


Commandery  K.  T.,  34; 
political  work  in  Connecti 
cut,  36-7;  midnight  caucus, 
38  ff.;  letter  to  H.  Wales 
Lines,  41;  newspaper  com 
ment  on  election  to  the 
Senate,  47  ff.;  dispatch  from 
Gunn,  50;  reception  fol 
lowing  election,  49  ff.  ;  goes 
to  Hartford,  52-3;  goes  to 
Washington,  54;  contem- 

Eoraries  in  first  term  as 
enator,  55;  first  appoint 
ments  on  committees,  56; 
first  utterances  in  Senate, 
57-8;  delivers  eulogy  on 
Rush  Clark,  58-60;  traits 
as  Senator,  61  ff.;  eulogy  on 
Senator  Gear,  62;  Cullom's 
tribute  to,  63-4;  compared 
with  Hawley,  65;  physical 
appearance  as  Senator,  66- 
7;  his  ideal  of  the  Senator- 
ship,  68-9;  "age  does  not 
amount  to  much,"  69; 
Chairman  of  the  Patents 
Committee,  70  ff.;  address 
on  patent  system,  7  1  ;  speech 
in  defence  of  same,  75  ff.; 
work  in  framing  acts  relat 
ing  to  patents,  82;  inter 
national  copyright,  83  ff.; 
co-workers  with,  for  Inter 
national  Copyright  law,  92  ; 
introduces  bill,  93;  assumes 
active  management  of  cam 
paign,  94;  explains  nature 
of  bill,  96;  holds  Senate  to  its 
consideration,  97;  copyright 
not  a  monopoly,  98;  amend 
ments  offered  by  Frye 


646 


Index 


Platt,  Orville  H. — Continued 
and  Sherman,  100-1;  bill 
passed,  101;  appointed  one 
of  conferees  for  Senate,  101 ; 
letter  to,  from  Cercle  de  la 
Librairie  and  Syndicat  de  la 
Propriete"  Litt6raire  et  Ar- 
tistique,  103-4;  letter  from, 
to  Robert  Underwood  John 
son,  104;  guest  of  honor  at 
banquet  in  New  York,  102; 
letter  from,  to  Dana  Estes, 
105-6;  effect  of  copyright 
law,  106;  subsequent  work 
along  this  line,  106  ff.;  letter 
from  Bronson  Howard  to, 
107;  work  for  American 
dramatists,  106-7;  bill  to 
remedy  discrimination 
against  Continental  writers, 
107;  letter  from  George 
Haven  Putnam  regarding 
same,  108-9;  resolutions  of 
sympathy  on  death  of  Sena 
tor  Platt,  by  American  Pub 
lishers'  Copyright  League, 
109-10;  tribute  to,  from 
Robert  Underwood  John 
son,  secretary  of  same,  no; 
tribute  to,  by  George  Haven 
Putnam,  111-3;  protector 
of  the  Indian,  114  ff. ;  mem 
ber  of  Committee  on  Indian 
Affairs,  114;  Chairman  of 
this  Committee,  116;  letter 
to,  from  Henry  L.  Dawes, 
1 1 6-7 ;  opening  of  Cherokee 
Outlet,  117;  bill  for  Chippe- 
was  of  Minnesota,  118; 
opinion  of  Carlisle,  119; 
opinion  of  treaties  with 
civilized  tribes,  119;  de 
nounces  abuses  in  Indian 
Territory,  120;  self-govern 
ment  in  Territory  a  failure, 
12 1 ;  President  McKinley 
asks  aid  of,  122;  letter  from, 
to  McKinley,  on  Indian 
problem,  122-4;  letter  to 
Herbert  Welsh,  on  appoint 
ments  by  Hoke  Smith,  125; 
letter  to  Lyman  Abbott, 
126;  Pima  reservation  epi 
sode,  127;  letter  regard 
ing,  127-8;  letter  regarding 
Rosebud  reservation,  128- 


9;  letter  to  F.  J.  Kingsbury, 
129;  letter  to,  from  Mak 
She  Ka  Tan  No,  Kickapoo 
Indian,  130-1;  interview  of 
Indians  with,  131-2;  trib 
ute  of  Senator  Morgan  to 
work  for  Indians,  132-3; 
work  for  the  West,  134  ff.; 
service  with  Committee  on 
Territories,  134;  tribute  to 
New  England,  134-5;  un 
derstanding  of  Western 
character,  135;  action  on 
Mormon  question,  135-6; 
conviction  regarding  admis 
sion  of  new  States,'  136 
-7;  advocates  admission  of 
Washington,  137;  defence 
of  New  England,  138-9; 
sympathy  with  the  people  of 
Dakota  in  resisting  change 
of  name,  140;  reply  to  Sen 
ator  Butler  regarding  same, 
140;  advocates  admission  of 
Dakota  against  Democratic 
opposition,  141;  advocates 
division  of  ^  Dakota,  142; 
secures  admission  of  Idaho 
and  Wyoming,  143;  admis 
sion  of  Utah  and  Oklahoma, 
143,  144;  letter  to  L.  F. 
Parker  on  admission  of 
Oklahoma,  144;  letter  re 
garding  patronage  in  Terri 
tories,  145;  Chairmanship  of 
Committee  on  Territories, 
146;  attitude  toward thefor- 
eign-born  American,  147  ff.; 
affiliation  with  Know-Noth 
ing  party,  147;  commends 
French  Canadians,  148;  ad 
vocates  prohibition  of  con 
tract  labor,  149-50;  reasons 
for  opposing  Chinese  bill, 
150;  supports  educational 
test  for  citizenship,  150; 
speech  on  Chinese  Exclu 
sion,  151-2;  relations  with 
China  discussed^  153  ^ff.; 
speech  on  treaty  with  China, 
154-6;  speech  against  Chi 
nese  Exclusion  bill  of  Sept. 
3,  1888,  157-60;  opposes 
Exclusion  bill  of  1904,  162- 
3;  letter  of  approval  to, 
from  former  Secretary  of 


Index 


647 


Platt,  Orville,  H. — Continued 
State,  163;  work  for  sound 
finance,  164  ff. ;  letter  con 
cerning  same,  to  John 
H.  Flagg,  165;  speech  on 
Funding  bill,  168-71;  bank 
circulation,  173;  opposi 
tion  to  free  silver,  175  ff.; 
antagonist  of  Greenback 
propaganda,  176;  opposes 
Stewart  amendment,  177-8; 
debate  with  Senator  Stew 
art,  179-80;  letter  to  Henry 
C.Bowenon  Silver  law,  182- 
5;  letter  to  John  H.  Flagg 
on  repeal  of  Sherman  law, 
185-6;  speaks  in  favor  of 
Lodge  amendment,  187-8; 
opposes  fictitious  seignior 
age,  189  ff.;  opposes  paper 
currency,  193-5;  letter  to 
Samuel  Fessenden,  on  coin 
age  question,  196-7;  cur 
rency  reform,  199  ff.;  letter 
on  monetary  commission, 
200;  member  Finance  Com 
mittee  in  1897,  200,  201; 
letter  to,  from  Timothy 
Dwight,  on  gold  stand 
ard,  202;  Platt's  reply  to 
same,  202-4;  letter  on  main 
taining  gold' standard,  204- 
6;  letter  to  John  H.  Flagg 
on  conference  of  Fi 
nance  Committee,  207-9; 
Warwick  conference,  209; 
letter  to  John  H.  Flagg 
on  Congressional  situation, 
209-1 i ;  staunch  advocate 
of  protection,  212  ff.;  com 
ment  on  Cleveland's  mes 
sage,  213-4;  effect  of  pro 
tection  on  New  England 
discussed  by,  215-6;  free 
raw  materials,  argument  on, 
217-8;  discusses  surplus, 
218-9;  national  debt,  219- 
20;  advocates  repeal  of  in 
ternal  revenue  tax,  220-1; 
discusses  markets  of  the 
world,  221-2;  speech  on 
development  of  labor  and 
industry,  223-5;  discusses 
duty  on  tin  plate,  225;  re 
lation  of  tariff  to  trusts, 
speech  on,  225-6;  part  in 


Fifty-first  Congress,  227  ff.; 
brevity  of  speeches  by,  228; 
letter  regarding  McKinley 
bill,  229-30;  letter  on  Lodge 
Election  bill,  230;  letter  to 
William  C.  Miner,  230-1; 
letter  to  A.  H.  Kellam  on 
Senate  rules,  232-4;  views 
on  reciprocity,  235;  letter 
to  A.  H.  Kellam  on  same, 
235;  letter  to  Lynde  Har 
rison  on  same,  236;  refuses 
to  be  swayed  by  popular 
clamor,  239;  letter  oppos 
ing  free  lumber  and  free 
coal,  240;  Wilson-Gorman 
bill,  241  ff. ;  recollection  of 
conversation  with  Platt  on 
woollen  schedule,  by  S.  N. 

D.  North,    242;  comment 
on    part    taken    by    Platt 
in    debate,  243;    advocates 
duty  60  cents  on  coal,  243- 
4;  comment    on    difference 
between    two   bills,    244-5; 
on     incidental     protection, 
246;  Coxey's  army  due  to 
threat  of  bill,  247;  problem 
of    the    unemployed,    247; 
wool  schedule,  248;  defence 
of  farmer,    248-9;  attitude 
of  New  England  on  protec 
tion,  249-50;  Dingley  tariff, 
252     ff.;  work    on    Finance 
Committee     with     Aldrich 
and   Allison,   253;  methods 
in    replying     to     manufac 
turers,  253-4;  co-operation 
with  Representative  Russell 
of  Connecticut,  253;  letter 
to   New   Milford   manufac 
turer,     253-4;     makes     no 
speeches  during  debate,  255 ; 
answer  to  query  "Does  the 
foreigner  pay  the  tax?  "  255 ; 
letter   to    Charles    Hopkins 
Clark,  256;  sustains  admin 
istration  in  re  Kasson  treat 
ies,     257;  letter     regarding 
same,  257-9;   Cuban  situa 
tion,    260   ff.;  position    un- 
popularin  Connecticut,  261 ; 
counsels  deliberation,  261-3 ! 
submits    resolution    March 
23,1896,262;  lettertoGen. 

E.  S.    Greeley,    262;  letter 


648 


Index 


Platt,  Orville  H.— Continued 
to  A.  D.  Osborne,  263;  let 
ter  to  Rev.  E.  P.  Parker, 
263;  letter  to  H.  Wales 
Lines,  263-4;  letter  to 
Franklin  Farrell,  264;  op 
poses  intervention,  264;  let 
ter  to  Isaac  H.  Bromley, 
265-6;  letter  to  Charles 
Hopkins  Clark,  266;  letter 
to  Hon.  John  Birge,  266; 
letter  to  ex-Senator  George 
F.  Edmunds,  267-8;  sym 
pathy  with  McKinley,  269; 
letter  to  Rev.  William  B. 
Carey,  270;  counsels  calm 
judgment,  270;  letter  to  H. 
Wales  Lines,  271-2;  letter 
to  Governor  Cooke,  272; 
efforts  to  prevent  Congress 
overriding  the  President, 
272;  letter  to  John  H. 
Flagg,  273-4;  interview 
given  to  the  press,  174-5; 
letters  to  John  H.  Flagg 
almost  a  diary,  276  ff. ;  close 
to  McKinley,  276;  letters 
to  John  H.  Flagg,  276,  277, 
278;  attitude  of  Foreign 
Relations  Committee,  277, 
279-80;  speech  by  Platt 
opposing  Foraker  amend 
ment,  280-1;  dictates  state 
ment  of  position,  281-3; 
attitude  toward  expansion, 
284  ff. ;  opening  of  Philip 
pines  appeals  to  Platt  as 
religious  opportunity,  284; 
speech  on  annexation  of 
Hawaii,  285-6;  to  abandon 
Philippines  a  colossal  error, 
286;  letter  to  McKinley  re 
garding  this,  287-8;  rela 
tions  with  Yale  faculty,  288: 
with  Yale  anti-expansion 
ists,  288  ff.;  letter  to  Pro 
fessor  Fisher,  _  289-94; 
obliged  to  take  issue  with 
Hoar,  295;  opposes  Vest 
resolution,  296-300;  re 
sponse  to  Allen  of  Nebraska, 
297;  questioned  by  Hoar, 
297-8;  reply  to,  298-300; 
addresses  Brooklyn  Union 
League  Club  on  expansion, 
300-2;  Philippine  problem, 


303  ff.;  replies  to  Teller's 
criticism  of  administration 
policy  in  the  Philippines, 
3o3-7;  questioned  by  Hoar, 
304;  reply  to,  304-5;  re 
lations  with  Hoar  there 
after,  307;  attitude  toward 
Hawaii,  307-9;  letter  to 
Senator  Dillingham  on 
Alaskan  question,  310;  gov 
ernment  of  Cuba,  311  ff.; 
co-workers  in  Congress,  312; 
Chairman  of  Committee 
on  Relations  with  Cuba, 
312-3,  315;  opposes  annex 
ation  of  Cuba,  314;  letter 
to  E.  F.  Atkins  on  same, 
314-5;  letter  to  Judge 
George  Gray  on  same,  316- 
9;  arranges  for  sub-com 
mittee  to  visit  Cuba,  319- 
20;  visits  Cuba,  320;  Neeley 
and  Reeves  defalcation, 
320  ff. ;  takes  up  ques 
tion  of  allowances,  322-3; 
Cuban  scandals,  324  ff.;  de 
sire  for  home,  324-6;  let 
ters  to  Mrs.  Platt,  325-8; 
prepares  defence  of  admin 
istration,  326-8;  delivers 
speech,  328-32;  reply  to 
Senator  Bacon,  329-31; 
letter  to  General  Wood, 
332-4;  discusses  modifica 
tion  of  Foraker  amendment 
with  Foraker,  334;  letter 
from  Judea  to  John  H. 
Flagg,  335;  Platt  Amend 
ment,  336  ff.;  work  done 
in  Cuba  summarized,  336; 
action  regarding  Cuban 
Convention,  337-8;  confer 
ence  of  Republican  mem 
bers  of  committee  on  same, 
338-40;  Chandler's  recol 
lections  of  conference,  339- 
40;  co-operation  of  Demo 
cratic  members,  341;  sub 
mits  amendment  to  Army 
Appropriation  bill,  341-3; 
amendment  adopted,  343-4; 
Root  consults  Platt  regard 
ing  Cuban  independence, 
344;  reply  to,  344-5;  article 
in  World's  Work  on  Cuban 
annexation,  345-7;  letter 


Index 


649 


Platt,  Orville  H. — Continued 

to  member  of  Convention, 
346-8;  letter  to  E.  F.  At 
kins,  348-9;  article  by  Well- 
man  stating  Root  to  be 
author  of  Platt  Amend 
ment,  349-50;  comment  of 
Hartford  Courant  on  same, 
350;  letter  to  Charles  Hop 
kins  Clark  on  same,  351-2; 
indifference  to  Wellman 
statement,  352;  letter  to 
Charles  Hopkins  Clark  on 
same,  352;  query  from  John 
H.  Flagg  regarding  same, 
362;  reply  to  Flagg  letter, 
353;  memoranda  of  Platt 
Amendment,  353~4j  drafts 
fr 


of  suggestions  by  Chandler 
and  Cullom,  355;  Porto 
Rican  tariff,  357  ff.;  Platt 
confronts  new  problems, 
357;  letter  to  Foraker,  359- 
61;  protection  of  American 
labor,  360;  calls  on  Mc- 
Kinley,  361;  letter  on 
trade  with  Porto  Rico,  362; 
amendment  proposed  Janu 
ary  24,  1900,  363;  duty  on 
imports,  363;  amendment 
to  Hawaiian  bill,  363;  visits 
Cuba  on  tour  of  investi 
gation,  364;  letter  from 
Lyman  Abbott  to,  364;  re 
plies  to,  declining  to  write 
article  for  Outlook,  365-8; 
defines  position  of  anti- 
imperialist,  366;  defines 
position  of  free-trader,  366- 
8;  reciprocity  with  Cuba, 
369  ff.;  writes  to  General 
Wood  and  to  Secretary 
Root  on  same,  370;  letter  to 
Wood  quoted,  371;  article 
in  North  American  Review, 
371-3;  trade  relations  with 
Cuba  should  be  defined, 
372;  letter  to  sugar-planter, 
373;  discusses  beet -sugar 
in  North  American  Review, 
article  already  quoted,  374- 
6 ;  statement  to  the  press  on 
Cuban  reciprocity,  376-7; 
reply  to  Senator  Teller, 
377-8;  Platt  Amendment 
carried  out,  379;  tobacco 


interests  of  Connecticut  be 
siege  Platt,  380;  reply  to 
New  Haven  cigar-makers' 
union,  380-1 ;  letter  to  New 
Haven  editor,  381;  reply  to 
American  Protective  Tariff 
League,  381-2;  bulwark  of 
the  administration  in  sup 
port  of  reciprocity,  382; 
appeal  to  the  American 
people,  382-3;  opposes 
tariff  revision,  384  ff.;  de 
fines  protection,  384;  calls 
on  Roosevelt,  385;  letter  to 
member  of  Finance  Com 
mittee  regarding  same,  385- 
6;  opposes  joint  commis 
sion  to  consider  tariff  revis 
ion,  386;  letter  to  Roosevelt, 
387-91;  tariff  revision  un 
necessary,  387;  undesirable 
effect  on  the  country,  390; 
spectacular  revision  disas 
trous,  391;  duty  has  no 
effect  on  prices,  392;  duty 
on  wood  pulp,  392;  dump 
ing  question,  392-3;  reci 
procity  with  Canada,  393-4; 
letter  to  Wharton  Barker  on 
same,  393-4;  rules  of  the 
Senate, 395  ff.;  conservative 
yet  flexible  mind,  395;  sub 
mits  open  session  resolution, 
396;  speech  on  same,  397- 
9;  secret  session  relic  of 
monarchical  privilege,  397; 
secrecy  a  farce,  399;  debate 
on  closure,  401;  objects  to 
obstructive  tactics  on  the 
part  of  Teller,  402;  presents 
amendment  providing  for 
closure,  403;  address  in  sup 
port  of  same,  403;  com 
pares  Senate  to  House  of 
Lords,  403;  absurdity  of 
present  methods,  404-5; 
speech  at  Bridgeport  Cen 
tennial  banquet,  405-7; 
amendment  offered  to  the 
rules,  408;  gathers  material 
to  press  amendment,  410; 
letter  to  Jacob  L.  Greene  on 
same,  410;  dignity  of  the 
Senate,  411  ff.;  opposes 
Alaskan  delegate,  411;  ob 
jects  to  unanimous  consent 


650 


Index 


Platt,  Orville  H. — Continued 

rule,  411-2;  ideal  of  the 
Senatorship,  413-4;  letter 
to  John  H.  Flagg  on  Till- 
man-McLaurin  episode, 
415;  vote  on  Corbett  ap 
pointment,  416;  speech  on 
Quay  appointment,  416-8; 
views  on  labor  and  capital, 
419  ff.;  income  limited,  419- 
20;  equal  rights  not  neces 
sarily  equal  possessions,  42 1 ; 
attitude  on  Department  of 
Agriculture,  421;  reply  to 
Morgan  of  Alabama,  422; 
tribute  to  the  workingman, 
422-3;  Cleveland  sowing 
the  wind,  423;  study  of 
Bryan,  424-5;  letter  to  A. 
H.  Byington,  424-5;  ob 
stacle  in  the  way  of  Anti- 
Injunction  bill,  425;  op 
poses  Eight-Hour  law,  425; 
relations  with  Federation  of 
Labor,  425;  letter  to  Sec 
retary  Metcalf,  426;  letter 
to  Waterbury  Typographi 
cal  Union,  427;  letter  to 
Central  Labor  Union  of 
Waterbury,  427;  letter  to 
Hartford  manufacturer, 
427-8;  letter  to  M.  Hart 
ley,  428;  ciomment  on 
Standard  Oil,  428;  on  In 
come  Tax,  428-9;  com 
mends  Roosevelt's  action  on 
coal  strike  and  Northern 
Securities  case,  429-30;  ad 
dresses  Workingmen's  Club 
at  Hartford,  431-3;  opposes 
Anti-Option  bill,  433-5; 
replies  to  Connecticut  farm 
ers,  435-6;  discusses  farm 
ers'  problems,  436-7;  regu 
lation  of  corporations,  438 
ff. ;  opposes  indiscriminate 
assaults  on  trusts,  438;  op 
poses  monopoly,  439;  con 
solidation  of  capital  inevit 
able,  440-1;  necessity  of 
control  and  regulation,  441 ; 
Sherman  Anti-Trust  bill, 
442;  debate  on,  443-5;  let 
ter  to  Roosevelt  on  same, 
445-6;  favors  Bureau  of 
Corporations,  446-7;  dis 


sents  from  report  of  Judici 
ary  Committee  on  Little- 
field  Anti-Trust  bill,  447; 
regulation  of  beef  and  to 
bacco  trusts,  448;  letter  to 
William  E.  Chandler  on 
contribution  of  corporations 
to  campaign  fund,  448-9; 
objection  to  income  tax  pro 
vision  defined,  449-54;  op 
poses  corporation  income 
•  tax  per  se,  453-4;  Inter 
state  Commerce  law,  455 
ff.;  vitally  important  part 
of  Platt  in  its  preparation, 
455;  an  ti -pooling  clause 
opposed,  455-6;  President 
Hadley's  tribute  to  sagacity 
of,  in  this  connection,  456; 
tribute  of  Senator  Spooner 
to  same,  456-7;  speech  on 
Interstate  Commerce  bill, 
457-60;  supports  Elkins 
Act  of  1903,  460;  comment 
on  Roosevelt's  attitude 
toward  the  railroads,  461; 
predicts  overshadowing  of 
tariff  revision  by  railroad 
rates,  461;  letter  to  S.  C. 
Dunham,  462;  letter  to 
Charles  Hopkins  Clark, 
462-5;  letter  to  railway 
president,  465-6;  our  rela 
tions  to  other  Powers,  467 
ff.;  a  robust  American,  467; 
comment  on  the  battle  of 
Manila,  467;  speech  at  New 
Haven  Bar  Association  din 
ner  on  foreign  alliances, 
4'68;  Hawaiian  situation, 
470;  letter  to  M.  M.  Gower 
on  same,  470;  supports 
Cleveland  on  Venezuelan 
question,  471-2;  supports 
ratification  of  arbitration 
treaty  with  Great  Britain, 
473;  defends  motives  of 
Senate  on  same,  473-4;  re 
ply  to  editor  of  Outlook, 
474-7;  discusses  Clayton- 
Bulwer  treaty,  474-5;  letter 
to  Prof.  Waldo  G.  Platt, 
477;  letter  to  Lynde  Har 
rison  on  arbitration,  478; 
letter  to  Secretary  Hay  on 
same,  479-80;  letter  to 


Index 


651 


Platt,  Orville  H. — Continued 

Judge  Gray,  481;  letter  to 
S.  E.  Chaff ee,  481;  Panama 
Canal  discussion,  483.  ff. ; 
building  of  canal  dear  to 
Platt's  heart,  483;  supports 
Roosevelt  in  action,  484; 
letter  to  W.  F.  Osborne  on 
same,  484-5;  Rev.  Dr. 
Newman  Smyth  writes  to 
Platt  opposing  President, 
486;  reply  to,  486;  com 
ment  on  New  Haven  peti 
tion,  487-8;  speech  support 
ing  administration,  488-93; 
relations  with  the  President, 
494  ff.;  with  Hayes,  494; 
with  Garfield,  495;  media 
tion  for  Jewell,  495;  sup 
port  of  Arthur  as  President, 
496;  supports  Hawley  for 
nomination,  497;  opposi 
tion  to  Cleveland's  pension 
vetoes,  497-8;  supports 
Cleveland  in  action  during 
Debs  riots,  499-500;  friend 
ship  with  Harrison,  500-1; 
relations  with  McKinley 
and  Hanna,  502  ff. ;  letter  on 
nomination  of  McKinley, 
502-3;  letter  to  McKinley, 
504;  letter  to  John  R.  Buck 
suggesting  Hawley  for  Cab 
inet,  505;  second  letter  on 
same,  505-6;  correspond 
ence  with  Hanna  on  same, 
507-8;  friendship  with 
Hanna,  509;  tribute  to  Mc 
Kinley,  509-10;  relations 
with  Roosevelt,  511  ff.; 
called  to  confer  with  Roose 
velt,  511;  Roosevelt's  trib 
ute  to,  511-2;  characteriza 
tion  of  Roosevelt  by,  512; 
support  of  Roosevelt  in  Sen 
ate,  513;  favors  nomination 
of  Roosevelt,  513-9;  letter 
to  Philo  Pratt  Hotchkiss  on 
same,  514;  letter  defending 
Hanna,  515;  letter  regard 
ing  corporate  opposition  to 
Roosevelt,  515-7;  Roose 
velt  conservative,  517-8; 
letter  to  Charles  F.  Brooker 
urging  Roosevelt  delegation, 
519;  speech  at  State  Con 


vention  at  Hartford  for 
Roosevelt,  520;  eulogy  of 
Roosevelt,  520-1 ;  political 
methods  and  attitude  tow 
ard  patronage  matters,  524 
ff. ;  in  work  of  party  or 
ganization,  524;  letter  to 
Charles  F.  Chapin,  525;  let 
ter  to  J.  H.  McDonald,  525; 
letter  to  Michael  Kenealy, 
526-7;  letter  to  G.  Wells 
Root,  528;  letter  to  E.  F. 
Strong,  528;  letter  to 
Samuel  H.  Crampton,  529- 
30;  letter  to  Leslie  M.  Shaw 
objecting  to  T.  C.  Platt's 
control  of  New  York  ap 
pointments  of  Connecticut 
men,  532-3;  letter  to 
Roosevelt  suggesting  ap 
pointment  of  Lynde  Harri 
son  for  diplomatic  service, 
534;  position  in  Connecti 
cut  politics,  535  ff.;  never 
asked  for  State  appoint 
ment  after  entering  Senate, 
535;  meditates  resignation, 
536;  offered  office  of  Chief 
Justice  of  Supreme  Court 
of  errors  of  Connecticut, 
537;  refused  to  consider 
nomination  for  President  or 
Vice-President,  537;  letter 
to  Governor  Bulkeley,  537; 
letter  to  John  R.  Buck,  538; 
letter  to  Henry  T.  Blake, 
538-9;  letter  to  Samuel 
Fessenden,  539;  letter  to 
John  H.  Flagg,  540-1;  the 
Fessenden  episode,  542  ff.; 
suggested  for  Vice-Presi 
dency  with  McKinley,  542; 
letter  to  H.  Wales  Lines, 
543-4;  letter  to  John  R. 
Buck,  544;  letter  to  C.  H. 
Merritt,  544-5;  letter  to 
John  H.  Flagg,  545-6;  let 
ter  to  John  R.  Buck,  546-7; 
letter  to  James  Platt,  547; 
letter  to  Charles  Hopkins 
Clark,  548;  letter  to  H. 
Wales  Lines,  548-9;  letter 
to  Charles  W.  Pickett,  549- 
50;  letter  in  reply  to  accu 
sation  of  nepotism,  550-1; 
letter  to  Isaac  H.  Bromley, 


652 


Index 


Platt,  Orville  H.— Continued 

551-2;  statement  of  elec 
tion  expenses  of  1897,  552- 
3;  State  tribute  to  Senator 
Platt,  554  ff . ;  speech  before 
General  Assembly,  555-8; 
letter  to  H.  Wales  Lines  re 
garding  State  reception, 
558;  preparation  for  recep 
tion,  558-9:  telegram  from 
Senator  Beveridge,  559;  ed 
itorial  from  Hartford  Cour- 
ant>  559-6o;  editorial  of 
New  Haven  Leader,  560-1 ; 
letter  to  Charles  C.  Cook, 
561-2;  last  years,  563  ff.; 
goes  to  Adirondacks,  563-4; 
letter  to  Hanna  on  extra 
session,  564-5;  letter  to 
Hanna  on  Ohio  campaign, 
566;  support  of  Roose 
velt,  567;  supports  ac 
tion  on  Pension  Order  78, 
567;  postal  investigation, 
568;  letter  to  Dr.  Ford, 
568;  grief  at  Hanna's  death, 
569;  letter  to  Sperry,  570; 
letter  regarding  speech  at 
Meriden,  570;  last  session, 
571  ff.;  yields  membership 
of  Judiciary  Committee  to 
Hoar  in  1883,  571 ;'  becomes 
chairman,  571-2;  presides 
over  Swayne  impeachment 
court,  573-4;  diary  of  one 
day  in  Senator  Platt's  life, 
574-6;  variety  of  questions 
arousing  his  interest,  576- 
7;  opposes  Pure  Food  bill, 
577;  last  interview  recalled 
by  James  B.  Morrow,  578- 
9;  last  illness  and  death, 
581  ff.;  letter  to  Dr.  Ford, 
581-2;  dinner  to  Platt 
planned  by  Charles  Henry 
Butler,  582 ;  letter  of  Roose 
velt  regarding  dinner,  582- 
3;  letter  to  Butler  com 
menting  on  same,  583; 
death  of  General  Hawley, 
584;  eulogy  of  Hawley,  584; 
death,  585;  Mrs.  Platt  de 
clines  State  funeral,  585; 
funeral  simplicity,  586;  epi 
taph,  587;  estimate  of 
character  and  personal 


traits,  588  ff.;  personal  ap 
pearance,  588;  compared 
with  Lincoln,  588;  consid 
eration  for  others,  589-90; 
eulogy  of  Charles  A.  Rus 
sell,  590;  religious  feeling, 
591-2;  love  of  nature,  592; 
fondness  for  archaeology 
and  early  history  of  Con 
necticut,  593;  indifference 
to  money,  594;  aloofness 
from  local  politics,  595; 
tribute  to  Senator  Platt 
from  Roosevelt  in  appoint 
ing  James  Platt,  595;  in 
tegrity  and  sagacity,  596-7; 
tributes  of  others  at  death 
of  Platt,  598  ff.;  from  Wil 
liam  E.  Chandler,  599; 
from  Nelson  W.  Aldrich, 
599;  from  William  B.  Alli 
son,  600;  from  Shelby  M. 
Cullom,  600;  from  Presi 
dent  Taft,  600;  from  John 
C.  Spooner,  600;  from 
Elihu  Root,  600;  from  Ed 
ward  Everett  Hale,  600- 
i;  from  Charles  W.  Fair 
banks,  601 ;  from  Leslie 
M.  Shaw,  601 ;  from  Simeon 
E.  Baldwin,  601-2;  eulogies 
spoken  by  Henry  Cabot 
Lodge,  603-9;  by  Governor 
Bulkeley,  609-11;  by  F.  B. 
Brandegee,  611-3;  by 
Albert  J.  Beveridge,  613-4; 
by  Nelson  W.  Aldrich,  614- 
5;  by  John  T.  Morgan,  615; 
by  Knute  Nelson,  615-6; 
by  George  W.Perkins,  616- 
7;  by  N.  D.  Sperry,  617; 
by  Mr.  Hill,  617-8;  Appen 
dix,  619  ff.;  memorial  reso 
lutions  adopted  by  General 
Assembly  of  Connecticut, 
619-20;  message  of  Gov 
ernor  Roberts  announcing 
death  of  Platt,  620-2; 
bronze  memorials, 622 ;  Platt 
National  Park,  623;  edi 
torial  tributes  from  Hart 
ford  Courant,  623-5;  Water- 
bury  A  merican,  625;  Water- 
bury  Republican,  625-6; 
Meriden  Record,  626;  New 
Haven  Leader,  626-7;  New 


Index 


653 


Platt,  Orville  H. — Continued 

Haven  Register,  627;  New 
Haven  Journal  and  Courier, 
627;  New  London  Globe, 
627-8;  Brooklyn  Eagle, 
628-9;  New  York  Evening 
Post,  629;  New  York 
Staats-Zeitung,  629;  Phila 
delphia  Press,  633;  Peoria 
Evening  Star,  633;  Sioux 
Falls  Press,  634;  Kansas 
City  Journal,  634;  Topeka 
Capital,  635;  Seattle  Post- 
Intelligencer,  635;  Atlanta 
Constitution,  635 

Platt  Amendment,  341-3,  371 

Platt  memorials,  622 

Platt,  Simeon,  offer  of  aid  in 
financial  difficulty,  35 

Platt,  Thomas  Collier,  198;  con 
trol  of  New  York  appoint 
ments,  532,  544,  546-7 

Plumb,  Preston  B.,  55;  amend 
ment  to  Morrill  bill,  180 

Porter,  John  Addison,  support 
of  McKinley,  543;  suggests 
Platt  for  Vice-President, 
548 

Porto  Rican  tariff,  357  ff. 

Porto  Rico,  acquisition  of,  com 
pared  to  that  of  Philippines, 
301 

Post,  Hartford  (see  Hartford 
Post 

Proctor,  Redfield,  in  Fifty-sixth 
Congress,  312;  at  funeral  of 
Platt,  586 

Pugh,  James  Lawrence,  opposes 
Lodge  election  bill,  228 

Pure  Food  bill,  577 

Putnam,  George  Haven,  secre 
tary  American  Publishers' 
Copyright  League,  90;  cor 
respondence  with,  108-9; 
letter  from,  111-3 


Quay,  Matthew  Stanley,  con 
nection  with  Lodge  bill,  23 1 ; 
letter  from  Platt  regarding, 
232-4,  416,544,546-7 


Railroad  rates,  522 


Reciprocity  with  Cuba,  369 
Reed,  Thomas  B.,  aid  of  Inter 
national  Copyright  bill,  92; 
Mills  bill,  223;     change  of 
rules,  227;  attitude  toward 
Cuba,    258;    anti-imperial 
ism,  285,  294;     support  of, 
in    Connecticut,   502,    542, 
546;  Fessenden  episode,  549 
Reeves,  defalcation  of,  320 
River  and  Harbor  bill  of  1882, 

496 

Roberts,  Governor  Henry,  517 
Roosevelt,  Theodore,  message  of 
December,  1902,  206;  ac 
cepts  McKinley's  Cuban 
policy,  373;  special  mes 
sage  on  Cuban  reciprocity, 
376;  negotiates  reciprocity 
treaty  with  Cuba,  379;  an 
nual  message  on  same,  379; 
calls  extra  session,  380;  in 
clines  to  tariff  revision,  385; 
Platt  calls  on,  385;  calls 
special  session,  410;  Platt's 
letter  supporting,  429;  dis 
cusses  trusts  with  Platt, 
445;  recommends  railroad 
legislation,  461;  dealings 
with  Panama,  484;  Panama 
policy  assailed,  486;  friend 
liness  toward  Platt,  511- 
3;  conservatism  of,  517; 
Platt's  speech  on,  520;  in 
tends  calling  extra  session, 
1903.  564;  quotation  from, 
560;  Platt  supports,  in  1904 
election,  566;  action  on  Pen 
sion  Order  78,  567;  postal 
investigation,  568;  results 
of  1904  victory,  572;  letter 
from,  to  C.  H.  Butler,  con 
cerning  Platt,  582;  speaks 
to  James  Platt  praising  his 
father,  595 

Root,  Elihu,  Secretary  of  War, 
311;  consulted  by  Cuban 
delegates,  344;  relation  to 
Platt  Amendment,  349-50; 
Porto  Rican  tariff,  362; 
tribute  to  Platt,  600 
Rosebud  Reservation,  128-9 
Russell,  Charles  A.,  member 
Ways  and  Means  Commit 
tee,  253;  eulogy  of  Platt  on, 
590 


654 


( Index 


Sampson,  board  of  inquiry,  269; 
fleet  sails  for  Cuba,  284 

San  Domingo  treaty,  576, 578, 58 1 

Saulsbury,  Eli,  55 

Scott,  William  L.,  Chinese  bill, 
t  157;  Platt  protests,  158-60 

Scribner,  Charles,  91 

Seattle  Post-Intelligencer,  625 

Seligman  &  Co.,  575 

Senate,  rules  of,  395;  amend 
ment  to  Rule  IX.,  403; 
Platt's  speech  on  same, 

403-4 
Senatorship,    Platt's      ideal    of, 

595 

Seymour,  Thomas  H.,  32,  33 

Shaw,  Leslie  M.,  letter  from 
Platt  to,  532;  tribute  to 
Platt,  601 

Sherman,  James  Schoolcraft, 
eulogy  on  Platt,  602 

Sherman,  John,  international 
copyright,  100;  Silver  act, 
1 80-1 ;  Senate  Finance  Com 
mittee,  233;  in  Hayes's 
Cabinet,  494 

Sherman  Anti-Trust  bill,  442 

Sherman  law,  filibuster  over,  401 

Sherman,  Roger,  603 

Silliman,  Benjamin,  14 

Simonds,  William  E.,  advocate 
international  copyright,  92; 
leading  member  Confer 
ence  Committee  on  same, 
101;  receives  decoration 
Legion  of  Honor,  103 

Sioux  Falls  Press,  634 

Slavery,  Platt  discusses  effects 
^  of,  223-4 

Smith,  Hoke,  Platt  criticises 
conduct  of  Indian  affairs, 
124-5 

Smith,  Jeannie  P.,  marriage  to 
Senator  Platt,  26 

Smith,  Truman,  26 

Smithsonian  Institution,  Platt 
regent  of,  593 

Smyth,  Newman,  opposes  Pan 
ama  policy,  486 

South    Dakota,    debt   to   Platt, 

.634 
Spain,  Platt  discusses  war  with, 

281-2 
Sperry,  N.  D.,  member  ball  club 


at  Meriden,  28;  letters  from 
Platt  to,  29,  270;  eulogy  on 
Platt,  617 

Spooner,  John  Coit,  in  Fifty- 
sixth  Congress,  312;  Cuban 
allowances,  326-7;  speech 
on  Cuban  investigation, 
327;  opposes  Cuban  bonds, 
340;  aid  on  Platt  Amend 
ment,  341;  withdraws  from 
Judiciary  Committee,  425; 
interstate  commerce,  457; 
conference  with  Platt,  564; 
arbitration,  575,  579;  trib 
ute  to  Platt,  600 

Standing  Rock  Reservation,  126 

Stedman,  E.  C,  102 

Stewart,  William  M.,  179,  429; 
discussion  of  Indian  matters 
with,  576 

St.  Louis,  delegates  to,  544 

Sugar,  Democratic  vote  on,  246 

Swayne,  Charles,  impeachment 
of,  573,  579-80 

Syndicat  de  la  Proprie"te  Litte"- 
raire  et  Artistique,  103,  104 


Taft,  in  Philippines,  311;  tribute 

to  Platt,  600 

Taliaferro,  James  Piper,  312, 341 

Tariff  revision,  Platt's  letter  to 

Roosevelt    on,    387;    Platt 

writes  to  friends  concerning, 

391-4 

Teller,  Henry  M.,  55,  312;  Cu 
ban  amendment,  314;  visits 
Cuba,  320;  aid  in  Platt 
Amendment,  341 ;  assails 
Philippine  policy,  363;  Platt 
replies  to  attack  on  Cu 
ban  reciprocity  by,  377; 
asserts  privilege  of  declining 
to  answer  roll-call,  402;  re 
signs,  571;  eulogy  on  Platt, 
603 

Teller  resolution,  347 

Templier,  A.,  104 

Terry,  Major-General  Alfred  H., 
28,  29 

Tillman,  Benjamin,  409;  quarrel 
with  McLaurin,  415 

Tin  plate,  duty  on,  favored  by 
Platt,  225 

Topeka  Capital,  635 


Index 


655 


Torrington,  Conn.,  4 
Toucey,  Governor  Isaac,  33 
Towanda,  21 
Trusts,  Platt  holds,  not  result  of 

protection,  226 
Typographical  Union,  letter  to, 

427 


U 


Underground  Railway  in   Con 
necticut,  10 


Vaill,  Dr.,  10 

Vance,  Zebulon,  55 

Van  Ingen,  E.  H.,  presents 
memorial  tablet,  622 

Venezuela,  Cleveland's  message 
on,  470 

Vest,  George  G.,  55;  resolution 
against  retention  of  Philip 
pines,  295;  in  Fifty-sixth 
Congress,  312,  634 

Voorhees,  Daniel,  55 


W 


Waite,  M.  R.,  14 

Warnock,  Thomas,  547 

Warren,  Francis  Emory,  in 
Fifty-sixth  Congress,  312 

Warwick,  Rhode  Island,  meet 
ing  Finance  Committee  at, 
207,  209 

Washington,  Conn.,  birthplace 
of  Platt,  i ;  history  of,  4,  5 

Washington,  admission  to  Union, 
138-9 

Waterbury  American,  625 

Waterbury  Republican,  625 


Wellman,  Walter,  article  stating 
Root  to  be  author  of  Platt 
Amendment,  349-50;  Platt 
replies  to,  351 

Welsh,  H.,  125 

Wiley,  Dr.  H.  W.,  Platt  discusses 
leprosy  appropriation  with, 

575 

Wilson  bill  contrasted  with  Wil 
son-Gorman  Tariff  bill  by 
Platt,  244 

Wilson-Gorman  bill,  186;  stig 
matized  by  Cleveland,  241; 
dissatisfaction  with,  255; 
income-tax  provision,  449 

Windom,  William,  views  on  sil 
ver,  178 

Wolcott,  Edward  O.,  Senate 
Finance  Committee,  253;  in 
Fifty-sixth  Congress,  312 

Woman's  suffrage,  143 

Wood,  Fernando,  166 

Wood,  Leonard,  in  Cuba,  311- 
5;  allowances,  322-3;  Cu 
ban  trade  question,  369; 
letter  of  Platt  to,  371;  Cu 
ban  self-government,  336; 
letter  of  Platt  to,  332-4 

Woodruff,  Truman,  bill  ren 
dered  by  Platt  to,  20 

Wool  schedule,  Wilson-Gorman 
bill,  248 

World's  Work,  article  by  Platt 
in,  on  Cuba,  345-7 

Wyoming,  143 


Yale    University,    relations    of 

Platt  with,  493 

Yale,  anti-expansionists  of,  288 
"Yale  protest,"  486 


6274 


14  DAY  USE 

RETURN  TO  DESK  FROM  WHICH  BORROWED 

LOAN  DEPT. 

RENEWALS  ONLY— TEL.  NO.  642-3405 
This  book  is  due  on  the  last  date  stamped  below,  or 

on  the  date  to  which  renewed. 
Renewed  books  are  subject  to  immediate  recall. 


14 1970  88. 


REC'DLO    JUlfT 


70*1 pi* 


-ML 


INTEfi-LIBRk** 


LOAN 


1971 


LD21A-60m-3,'70 
(N5382slO)476-A-32 


General  Library 

University  of  California 

Berkeley 


